Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2007 01:41 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
? %-A4.tex-ps: %.sgml $(ALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl bookindex.sgml
? $(JADE.tex.call) -V texdvi-output -V '%paper-type%'=A4 -o $@ $
+ ifndef DRAFT
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2007 01:41 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
? %-A4.tex-ps: %.sgml $(ALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl bookindex.sgml
? $(JADE.tex.call) -V texdvi-output -V '%paper-type%'=A4 -o $@ $
+ ifndef DRAFT
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The rule re-runs the makefile for the specific target, and the target
modifies HTML.index, or it is only the HTML rule that modifies that.
Only the html rule modifies HTML.index.
That was a question I had. If that is true, it has to be:
%-A4.tex-ps: %.sgml
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The rule re-runs the makefile for the specific target, and the target
modifies HTML.index, or it is only the HTML rule that modifies that.
Only the html rule modifies HTML.index.
That was a question I had. If that is true, it has to be:
Patch applied.
---
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The problem is that this requires two runs even to proof the
documentation,
which I
Bruce Momjian wrote:
%-A4.tex-ps: %.sgml $(ALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl bookindex.sgml
$(JADE.tex.call) -V texdvi-output -V '%paper-type%'=A4 -o $@ $
+ ifndef DRAFT
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s HTML.index.start HTML.index || $(MAKE) $*
+ endif
What is the point of that?
--
Peter
Bruce Momjian wrote:
+ ifndef DRAFT
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s HTML.index.start HTML.index || $(MAKE) $*
+ endif
Why are you using $*? This isn't a pattern rule.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
---(end of
Bruce Momjian wrote:
! draft:
! ifndef DRAFT
! ifneq ($(MAKECMDGOALS), draft)
How could this condition ever match?
! # Call ourselves with the DRAFT value set. This seems to be the only
! # way to set gmake variables in a rule.
! [EMAIL PROTECTED](MAKE) DRAFT=Y $(MAKECMDGOALS))
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
? %-A4.tex-ps: %.sgml $(ALLSGML) stylesheet.dsl bookindex.sgml
? $(JADE.tex.call) -V texdvi-output -V '%paper-type%'=A4 -o $@ $
+ ifndef DRAFT
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s HTML.index.start HTML.index || $(MAKE) $*
+ endif
What is the
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
+ ifndef DRAFT
+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] -s HTML.index.start HTML.index || $(MAKE) $*
+ endif
Why are you using $*? This isn't a pattern rule.
Sorry, my mistake. Here is an patch to fix that.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
! draft:
! ifndef DRAFT
! ifneq ($(MAKECMDGOALS), draft)
How could this condition ever match?
On first call, 'draft' might be set, but in the recursive call, this
code will not be reached because DRAFT iss set.
Am Montag, 8. Januar 2007 05:10 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
Here is a patch that runs the build twice when HTML.index does not
exist, and once every time after that. This is not ideal, but it is a
start.
The problem is that this requires two runs even to proof the documentation,
which I think no
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Am Montag, 8. Januar 2007 05:10 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
Here is a patch that runs the build twice when HTML.index does not
exist, and once every time after that. This is not ideal, but it is a
start.
The problem is that this requires two runs even to proof the
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The problem is that this requires two runs even to proof the documentation,
which I think no one wants.
So what would the API be to signal you want a draft build?
gmake DRAFT=Y html
I'd vote for
gmake draft
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
The problem is that this requires two runs even to proof the documentation,
which I think no one wants.
So what would the API be to signal you want a draft build?
gmake DRAFT=Y html
I'd vote for
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
! # for some reason $wildcard expands too early, so we use 'test'
$wildcard is expanded whenever you tell it to. What did you write?
! @test -f
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:42:06AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Everyone using these tools knows about the two-pass behavior.
No, not everyone knows. In fact I would argue that most do not know. It
isn't
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 12:42:06AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Everyone using these tools knows about the two-pass behavior.
No, not everyone
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
! # for some reason $wildcard expands too early, so we use 'test'
$wildcard is expanded whenever you tell it to. What
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I don't know enough about the relevent tool to know if they actually
generate a warning about whether they need to be rerun. In any case it
seems a much better approach to simply run it again when needed rather
than
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I wrote:
ifeq (,$(wildcard bookindex.valid))
echo Run 'gmake' again to generate output with a proper index
endif
but that warns on the first _two_ runs, meaning it expanded at the
time the rule started, not at the time it hit that line.
This
Tom Lane wrote:
Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
automated build process, this seems unlikely.
Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no one will see
them, because the targets they
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
automated build process, this seems unlikely.
Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no
On Sun, 7 Jan 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
automated build process, this seems unlikely.
Taking a closer
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
automated build process, this seems unlikely.
Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no one will see
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
--
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
Index:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
This is just useless noise. If it could tell the difference between an
up-to-date index and a not-up-to-date one, there might be some
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
This is just useless noise. If it could tell the difference between an
up-to-date index and a not-up-to-date
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
This is just useless noise. If it could tell the difference between an
up-to-date
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
This is just useless noise. If it could tell the difference between an
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 23:38 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The attached patch warns users when they create documentation output
that has no index, and suggests re-running 'gmake'.
This is just useless noise. If it could tell the
31 matches
Mail list logo
