On 07.12.2010 21:18, Greg Ercolano wrote:

>       Sure; I assume by that you mean remove all references to
>       the EPSFILES and IMAGEFILES macros and their definitions.

Remove EPSFILES: yes; remove IMAGEFILES: no, maybe not.

Hypothetically, dependencies are used to trigger making the docs,
so that we would replace EPSFILES with IMAGEFILES in their property
as dependencies (then, the definition of EPSFILES is obsolete).

In fact, we will probably never (or only very seldom) change the
image files. More often we will change the source and header files
that contain the docs. Thus, keeping the images as dependencies is
more than questionable. Do we want to track dependencies manually,
or would it be better to remove them entirely? Maybe add .PHONY
somewhere? I don't know...

I always use "make clean html" or "make clean pdf" to be sure.

>       From what I can tell just quickly looking at the Makefile,
>       both can probably be removed, as by my read the only reason
>       IMAGEFILES is in there is to create the eps files, and I only
>       yesterday checked in the rules that actually converts them.

I believe the real reason was that they were used as dependencies.
Nobody thought of converting them automatically before you did ;-)

>       So regarding the Makefile, I can:
>
>               1) Remove the rules added yesterday
yes

>               2) Remove the EPSFILES and IMAGEFILES macros
see above

>       I'll do that as part of the entire cleanup.
>
>       This will mean touching a lot of code, so I'll be sure to
>       drop a line here when I start that task. Won't be now, but
>       probably tonight after work.

That's fine, but probably not a problem since I wouldn't expect
any conflicts with someone editing code or docs, since you only
touch the \image statements, don't you?

Albrecht
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to