On Tue, 14 Aug 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 14-8-2012 13:50, michael.vancanneyt-0is9kj9s...@public.gmane.org wrote:
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
On 14-8-2012 11:34, Marco van de Voort wrote:
In our previous episode, Reinier Olislagers said:
in packages\fcl-res\xml) but not in the bin directory.
IIRC, fpdoc picks up fpdoc.css when generating HTML/CHM output.
Shouldn't fpdoc.css be also present under the bin directory then?
Thanks,
Reinier
Bump.
Any reactions?
The scripts that generate have their own locations set to the fpdoc.css
Since generating docs requires additional repositories (like fpcdoc),
it is
not a standard feature of installs anyway.
True for fpc source docs...
So you're saying FPC users who don't have the source installed (e.g. on
Debian) should get the source, download fpdoc.css separately or create
their own if they want to generate HTML documentation of their own code.
Doesn't seem user friendly.
There is no discussion that fpdoc.css should be distributed.
Yes, you told me. I'm asking because I'm not sure what Marco wanted (and
anybody else).
The only question is: where should we put it ?
Apparently the bin directory is not satisfactory (though I don't see why)?
2 reasons:
1. I do not think you should put such files there. I know that there are
some historic reasons for putting some 'extra' things there, but I
think we should change that DOS habit.
2. fpdoc.exe will not search it there. By putting it there you will create the
expectation that it will search for it there (as some of the other utils do),
but it will not.
On my Laz install (installed by Win installer) I only have bin,msg,units
under the fpc directory.
Perhaps there are others in other versions...
What about the fpc root directory then?
I think it is better to have it in fpc/docs.
Michael.
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
