On 03/10/12 21:37, Warren Young wrote:
On 10/2/2012 1:10 PM, David Stacey wrote:
On 02/10/12 02:27, Warren Young wrote:
You should keep using -1 for subsequent build attempts
>
Apologies for that. I was following the advice here:
http://cygwin.com/setup.html#submitting
I was sure I'd seen Corinna complain about a -1 to -2 during a similar
discussion over a proposed package upload, but even if my recollection
is correct, I think the public document takes precedence.
Thanks to Warren and Christopher for the clarification. I'll revert to a
-1 name - you all have to promise not to get confused :-)
2. /usr/share/doc/doxygen/latex should be removed,
I agree completely, but I kept the 'latex' directory for a couple of
reasons. Firstly, this was consistent with the previous build of doxygen
(1.7.4-1), which included the latex directory [1].
Yes, I realize you were just following my previous example, but I'm
far from infallible. I saw something in your package I would have
removed from mine if I'd realized that at the time.
I had a private e-mail yesterday from someone requesting that the latex
directory be retained. No reason was given. If Sergio would like to
reply to the mailing list with his reasons then I will consider them.
However, in the absence of a compelling argument, Warren has convinced
me: the latex directory will go. I'll generate a PDF of the manual and
include that as Warren suggested.
There's a bogus test in Doxygen's configure script, where it goes
looking for dot(1) from GraphViz. It does a weak check for it in a
few common locations, and yells if it isn't there. dot(1) being a
filter, there isn't a huge penalty for using the native Windows
version, which of course doesn't get installed in any of those
locations. It would be nice to either 1) send upstream a test using
the PATH instead of a hardcoded list; or 2) adopt Yaakov's GraphViz
package:
If the configure script doesn't detect dot(1) then it isn't the end of
the world - you can specify the location of the dot executable by
specifying DOT_PATH in the project configuration file:
Are you sure Doxygen doesn't use dot during the package build process,
such as part of building Doxygen's own manual? I don't see why it
would bother trying to find it at configure time otherwise.
There is a HAVE_DOT in the project configuration file, and I was hoping
that doxygen might be clever and default this to YES or NO based on the
test in the configure file - but I don't think it does! I've had a quick
grep through the source code, and the only apparent use of this dot(1)
check is that one of the examples gets skipped if dot(1) is missing.
I will try to have the next doxygen package ready for about this time
tomorrow. Thank you for all your advice with this - hopefully we're
nearly there now!
Dave.