On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 05:40:15PM +0100, Johannes Rohrer wrote: > * 2012-12-13 15:50 +0100 Phil Holmes: > > "Johannes Rohrer" <[email protected]> wrote in message > > news:3024240.rYn4viUYfR@irrwitzer... > > > 'make doc' generates the texinfo file for the Internals Reference > > > from ly/generate-documentation.ly, which in turn relies on > > > scm/document*.scm and their recursive dependencies to do the actual > > > work. In the process, settings encoded in various other files get > > > documented, e.g. from ly/engraver-init.ly and scm/define-*.scm. > > > > > > Changes to such files do not necessitate, nor trigger, recompiling > > > the LilyPond binary; yet that is the only dependency marked: > > > > > > --- Documentation/GNUmakefile, lines 287-288 --- > > > $(outdir)/internals.texi: $(LILYPOND_BINARY) > > > cd $(outdir) && $(buildscript-dir)/run-and-check > > > "$(LILYPOND_BINARY) --verbose > > > $(top-src-dir)/ly/generate-documentation" > > > "generate-documentation.log" > > > --- > > > > In this situation, I believe we expect developers to run > > > > make > > make doc > > > > rather than have make doc remake the binaries. > > But that does not work? > > Say, I change scm/translation.scm, one of the files responsible for IR > generation, and nothing else. > > The LilyPond binary does not depend on scheme files, so 'make' > (correctly) does NOT recreate it. > > Hence, without the added dependencies, neither does 'make doc' recreate > internals.texi.
Just to let the bug squad know, Johannes Rohrer created his own tracker for this. http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3020 Cheers, Colin. -- Colin Hall _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
