Implementing notrans_man_MANS (Was: Automake bug #516 -- and more)
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hello Ralf, * Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 10:28:28AM CET: [...] (1) In some cases it is completely inadequate to apply the program name transform to manpage names. [...] Maybe that could be taken care of by something like notransform_MAN_MANS (needs a better name). notrans_man_MANS sounds good to me. I now have a working version of notrans_man1_MANS Co, but I noticed an additional problem: The target 'install-man1' tries to install, e.g., '$(dist_man1_MANS)' but doesn't depend on it. I want to fix that as well, at the same time omitting unused variables. Still missing are: (1) documentation in autoconf.texi, (2) a test case, and (3) a ChangeLog entry. How should I proceed, once all that is finished? Email to you and/or automake bugzilla? Are unified diffs against the autoamke-1.10.1 tarball OK? What about re-indenting existing code? (2) There are packages with translated manpages -- good. But automake provides no way to supress their installation or to install them for a subset of the available languages -- not good. I'll come back to this at some later time. Regards Peter
Re: Automake bug #516 -- and more
Hello Peter, * Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 10:28:28AM CET: [...] My frustration was mostly due to the fact that I never got any reaction. I think I could have provided a ChangeLog entry and a test, if asked for it. And lack of communication on my side certainly didn't help. I recently stumbled (once again) at two other manpage related automake problems, where I'd like to try for solutions provided there is a realistic chance that such solutions would be included in a future automake release. The problems are these: (1) In some cases it is completely inadequate to apply the program name transform to manpage names. E.g., in the man-db package there is manpath.1 describing the manpath command (should be transformed), and manpath.5 describing the format of the manpath configuration file (should certainly not be transformed). Yes that is a problem. Your example shows that even a suitably detailed transform script won't help if two manpages differ only in their extension. Maybe that could be taken care of by something like notransform_MAN_MANS (needs a better name). notrans_man_MANS sounds good to me. Moreover, renaming manpath=xmanpath and manpath.1=xmanpath.1 without changing the manpage contents is sort of strange. Well, isn't that in the realm of the rules generating manpath.1? Not that I say it's nice, but I don't either think Automake can just blindly do some transformation on the contents it would see fit. (2) There are packages with translated manpages -- good. But automake provides no way to supress their installation or to install them for a subset of the available languages -- not good. At the moment all available translated manpages are installed unconditionally (under the assumption that the packaging system of a distribution takes care of this?). I think something analogous to --disable-nls and/or LINGUAS=xxx for translated manpages is very desirable. Colin submitted this: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2007-10/msg00015.html but I haven't had time to think about it. The biggest problem I see is how to define suitable interfaces (LINGUAS is already used by gettext, shouldn't stomp on that). Suggestions welcome. Cheers, Ralf
Re: Automake bug #516 -- and more
On Tue, 22 Jan 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hello Ralf, I did take a look at history now, and think that your patch is ok, and the order reversing just an oversight. The patch is missing a ChangeLog entry and a test. Providing them would have saved me time processing the bug. Thanks a lot. I am terribly disappointed that I never got any reaction and that this bug is still present in the new release. And you've made that quite clear by spamming it to five lists instead of to bug-automake as noted. I've limited that to automake lists now. Sorry, that was caused by simply replying to the original mail. My frustration was mostly due to the fact that I never got any reaction. I think I could have provided a ChangeLog entry and a test, if asked for it. --- I recently stumbled (once again) at two other manpage related automake problems, where I'd like to try for solutions provided there is a realistic chance that such solutions would be included in a future automake release. The problems are these: (1) In some cases it is completely inadequate to apply the program name transform to manpage names. E.g., in the man-db package there is manpath.1 describing the manpath command (should be transformed), and manpath.5 describing the format of the manpath configuration file (should certainly not be transformed). Maybe that could be taken care of by something like notransform_MAN_MANS (needs a better name). Moreover, renaming manpath=xmanpath and manpath.1=xmanpath.1 without changing the manpage contents is sort of strange. (2) There are packages with translated manpages -- good. But automake provides no way to supress their installation or to install them for a subset of the available languages -- not good. At the moment all available translated manpages are installed unconditionally (under the assumption that the packaging system of a distribution takes care of this?). I think something analogous to --disable-nls and/or LINGUAS=xxx for translated manpages is very desirable. --- What is your opinion? Regards, Peter Breitenlohner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
