Markus:
> why not have both converters in Perl and Python?
seems like too much double handling to me. just pick whichever one and go
with it. sorting the rest out as needed is probably less work than trying
to get the two to work in parallel.
Hamish
Markus Neteler wrote:
> >> I have reduced it to these errors here:
> >> htmlmapdriver.html:63
> >> wxGUI.html:154
> >> wxGUI.Vector_Digitizing_Tool.html:210
> ...
> > yeah, and https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/612
> ...
> > just one last repeat of the python vs. perl dep:
>
> Simple suggesti
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Hamish wrote:
> Markus wrote:
>> I have reduced it to these errors here:
>> htmlmapdriver.html:63
>> wxGUI.html:154
>> wxGUI.Vector_Digitizing_Tool.html:210
...
> yeah, and https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/612
...
> just one last repeat of the python vs. perl d
Markus wrote:
> I have reduced it to these errors here:
> htmlmapdriver.html:63
> wxGUI.html:154
> wxGUI.Vector_Digitizing_Tool.html:210
thanks,
> Those are tricky issues (too tired now),
yeah, and https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/612
(r37877 never got backported (or foreported) btw; I'm
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Glynn Clements
wrote:
...
> Back-porting is just a matter of copying g.html2man.py from 7.0 and
> changing HTML2MAN in man/Makefile (remove the "sh").
[and add the .py extension of course]
> Trying this, I get errors in 66 files, while 416 build without error.
>
Markus Neteler wrote:
> > IMHO, the main reason to stick with the Perl version isn't down to
> > which language to make a required dependency, but the effort required
> > to clean up the 6.x manpages.
>
> If the Python version would be backported to 6.5, I could walk through the
> HTML pages, fi
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Glynn Clements
wrote:
...
> IMHO, the main reason to stick with the Perl version isn't down to
> which language to make a required dependency, but the effort required
> to clean up the 6.x manpages.
If the Python version would be backported to 6.5, I could walk th
Hamish wrote:
> Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
> will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
> g.html2man.
> Hamish:
> >>> At this point, my vote, AFA 6.4.0 goes, is to follow the
> >>> path of least change. Which is to keep the existing perl
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Hamish wrote:
Glynn wrote:
> Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
> will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
> g.html2man.
...
> Martin:
>>> OK, anyway I would vote to replace Perl script in 6.5.
...
> actually
>>> Glynn wrote:
Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
g.html2man.
Hamish:
>>> At this point, my vote, AFA 6.4.0 goes, is to follow the
>>> path of least change. Which is to keep the existing perl
>>> script
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Martin Landa wrote:
> 2010/1/19 Hamish :
>> Glynn wrote:
>>> Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
>>> will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
>>> g.html2man.
>>
>> At this point, my vote, AFA 6.4.0 goes, is to follow the path
Hi,
2010/1/19 Hamish :
> Glynn wrote:
>> Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
>> will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
>> g.html2man.
>
> At this point, my vote, AFA 6.4.0 goes, is to follow the path of
> least change. Which is to keep the existing perl scri
Markus Neteler wrote:
> > I've never noticed it, because man/Makefile silently skips building
> > the manpages if Perl isn't present (I don't have it on Windows).
>
> That's right but "tar" complains (read: warns) about the missing man
> stuff later. Perhaps it has to be conditionalized upon per
Glynn wrote:
> Maybe we should use the Python version from 7.0? Many users
> will want Python anyhow, whereas Perl is only used for
> g.html2man.
At this point, my vote, AFA 6.4.0 goes, is to follow the path of
least change. Which is to keep the existing perl script.
> OTOH, how many Windows use
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 7:20 AM, Glynn Clements
wrote:
>
> Markus Neteler wrote:
>
>> we try to compile winGRASS on a colleague's computer (XP),
>> following
>> https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/CompileOnWindows
>>
>> ./mswindows/osgeo4w/package.sh
>> ...
>> checking for perl... no
>> ...
>>
>> At
Markus Neteler wrote:
> we try to compile winGRASS on a colleague's computer (XP),
> following
> https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/CompileOnWindows
>
> ./mswindows/osgeo4w/package.sh
> ...
> checking for perl... no
> ...
>
> At this point, MAN is not created, leading to a tar packaging error la
Hi,
we try to compile winGRASS on a colleague's computer (XP),
following
https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/CompileOnWindows
./mswindows/osgeo4w/package.sh
...
checking for perl... no
...
At this point, MAN is not created, leading to a tar packaging error later.
But:
$ perl -v
This is perl., v5.
17 matches
Mail list logo
