John Darrington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 09:37:45AM -0800, Ben Pfaff wrote: > "make distcheck" currently fails because doc/ni.texi is not > distributed, which forces the Info documentation to be remade. > But that's not supposed to happen: we shouldn't require it to be > remade if the user doesn't change it, and in fact the distcheck > target enforces that by making the source directory read-only. > > I think it's a bit of a silly requirement. Imagine if the same policy > existed for the binaries as well as the documentation. Distributing > something which whose corresponding source is also distributed is > redundant.
I think the requirement to distribute Info file is a relic of an earlier age, where Texinfo was less likely to be available on the systems where GNU programs are installed. But as long as it's still a requirement, I'd prefer that we not force the Info documentation to be rebuilt by every user, especially if it breaks distcheck. > OK to check in? > > Have you verified that ni.texi will, in fact, get rebuilt if it's > dependencies change? If so, then go ahead and check it in. Thanks for the reminder; I'll verify that before I check it in. -- Peter Seebach on managing engineers: "It's like herding cats, only most of the engineers are already sick of laser pointers." _______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
