Hello, On Oct 5, 2010, at 7:34 PM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Martin, > Waiting for your decision. > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <alon.bar...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> make dist: require xsltproc, docbook-xsl, don't require playing with >>> symlinks (assumes/requires running from version control checkout) >> >> make dist *WILL NOT* require xsltproc, docbook-xsl. >> It will actually only distribute the sources, no generation of files. >> >>> make, make install: don't require xsltproc and docbook-xsl, use the >>> pre-generated man files. >> >> make *WILL* require xsltproc and docbook-xsl if and only if >> --enable-man and/or --enable-doc is specified at configure. >> >> If you want to avoid xsltproc dependency from make install, we back to >> square one (current trunk). Current build files are OK as long as they work. I can't copy the relevant lines but I've seen some "missing html.out required for XXX" kind messages from make, but they usually magically disappear with make clean/make -j 8 (could it be some race condition?) Personally I don't mind simplicity in build files. 99% of people run binaries or packages, 99% of people who don't run binary packages on Linux know what they are doing. Or won't mind downloading an extra few packages or not having the man pages. Don't really have a preference. It's your call :) -- @MartinPaljak.net +3725156495 _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
