Follow-up Comment #8, bug #66583 (group groff): At 2024-12-22T08:09:41-0500, anonymous wrote: > Follow-up Comment #7, bug #66583 (group groff): > > [comment #6 comment #6:] >> There's some grief to work through. >> >> [...] >> >> My guess is that onf's if HAVE_MAKEINFO conditional eats too much. > > It took me a while to figure out what those warnings even mean. > Looking at doc/doc.am, I see that there are a bunch of > suspicious-looking make targets, most notably `all` which is > referenced by the warnings. The warnings seem to complain (among other > things) that Makefile.am is trying to define target `all` which was > already defined in doc/doc.am. That is not a defect introduced by my > patch, though; I merely surrounded those rules in doc/doc.am with a > conditional.
I believe that _is_ in fact a defect introduced by your patch; the mere
surrounding of Make target rules with these conditionals _is_ the
defect.
I tried an alternate approach, indirecting the prerequisite file names
of the groff.{info,txt,html} files through Make macros, and the build is
quiescent in this respect now.
One of us (or a friendly observer) can dig into the GNU Automake manual
or ask on its support mailing list for clarification of the issue, of
course.
> Looking at the affected area of doc/doc.am, there is not a single
> thing within the conditional that is not info-related; in fact the
> entire area is introduced by a long comment beggining with
>
> # groff Texinfo manual
Right. But there is a difference between macro definitions and target
rules.
> In any case, it seems you ran this with HAVE_MAKEINFO evaluating to
> true. If that's the case, the conditional shouldn't change anything;
> the result should be equivalent to the conditional line not even being
> there.
Did you try this scenario yourself?
> So I believe those warnings might not be related to my patch; maybe
> they just stopped being silent for some reason.
I am dubious.
But I've got a working patch now, so I can proceed.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66583>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
