On Monday 10 September 2007 18:16, Ian Lynagh wrote: > Hi Sven, > > On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 08:42:11AM -0700, Sven Panne wrote: > > Sun Sep 9 08:40:53 PDT 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > * Include package documentation, n-th attempt... > > Am I right in thinking that this: > > # This is a cruel hack: There seems to be no way to install the Haddock > # documentation into the build directory, because DESTDIR is alway > prepended. # Furthermore, rpm removes the target documentation directory > before the doc # macros are processed. Therefore we have to copy things > back into safety... :-P > > is because you want to package the documentation up separately from > everything else? I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "into the build > directory".
No, the problem is: The "make install-docs" stage copies (among other things) all Haddock docs to the documentation directory below $(DESTDIR) *but* rpm explicitly removes the documentation directory below $(DESTDIR) before any of the %doc macros are processed. Therefore, all the installed Haddock docs have an extremely short lifetime and would not be included in the RPM(s). ;-) rpm seems to have the builtin assumption that all documentation is in the build tree (not the install tree), so I copy it back into the build tree. All this stuff is extremely tricky, we still deviate from the GNU standards in subtle ways at a few points, the assumptions which paths are compiled into what at which times are not perfect, then there's the completely different layout on Windows, etc. The current state of affairs took me about 2 dozen 'rpmbuild's, which is no fun, but I think we are slowly approaching a sane state. Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
