Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc

2012-11-05 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
 --- Em dom, 4/11/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:

 De: Bruce Dubbs
 Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc
 Para: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
 Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 22:58


 Perhaps we should promote gtk-doc to recommended, but I can
 see where
 users really don't care about installing the
 documentation.  Some
 packages will assume it, but others not.  The only
 other solution I can
 see is to address the issue package by package as needed.

 Bruce, I think your simple solution is best: promote gtk-doc to
 recommended, with a small parenthesis telling about possible future
 install problems, if not installed, or something like that.

I went back and looked at my log and it does not indicate the problem 
you have.  From my log:

checking whether to build gtk-doc documentation... no
...
test -z /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl || /bin/mkdir -p 
/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl
...
install: creating directory '/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images'
'docs/images/GEGL.png' - '/usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images/GEGL.png'
...


I don't think your issue is caused by gtk-doc.

   -- Bruce

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page


Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc

2012-11-04 Thread Fernando de Oliveira
--- Em dom, 4/11/12, Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com escreveu:

 De: Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com
 Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc
 Para: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
 Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 21:10
 On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 02:29:39PM
 -0800, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
  
  I purposely have not installed GTK-Doc up to now, and
 it seems to be assumed there by some packages.
 
  Yes, many packages assume gtk-doc.  I take the view
 that it is
 easier to just install it.

Agree. Wish the book would agree too, as it is only mentioned as Optional in 
many, e.g. GTK:

 Optional

Cups-1.6.1, DocBook-utils-0.6.14, gobject-introspection-1.34.1.1 and 
GTK-Doc-1.18

A note or something could be done.

It is not required by gegl or dependencies, but it is probable it should be 
as there is explicit mention to it in the install instructions:

/usr/share/gtk-doc, in
install -v -m644 docs/*.{css,html} /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl 
install -d -v -m755 /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images 
install -v -m644 docs/images/* /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images


[]s,
Fernando
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page


Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc

2012-11-04 Thread Fernando de Oliveira
Resending with proper line format.

--- Em dom, 4/11/12, Ken Moffat escreveu:

 De: Ken Moffat
 Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc 
 blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
 Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 21:10
 On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 02:29:39PM
 -0800, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
 
  I purposely have not installed GTK-Doc up to now, and
 it seems to be assumed there by some packages.

  Yes, many packages assume gtk-doc.  I take the view
 that it is
 easier to just install it.

Agree. Wish the book would agree too, as it is only mentioned as Optional
in many, e.g. GTK:

Optional

Cups-1.6.1, DocBook-utils-0.6.14, gobject-introspection-1.34.1.1 and
GTK-Doc-1.18

A note or something could be done.

It is not required by gegl or dependencies, but it is probable it should
be as there is explicit mention to it in the install instructions:

/usr/share/gtk-doc, in
install -v -m644 docs/*.{css,html} /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl 
install -d -v -m755 /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images 
install -v -m644 docs/images/* /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images


[]s,
Fernando
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page


Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc

2012-11-04 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
 Resending with proper line format.

 --- Em dom, 4/11/12, Ken Moffat escreveu:

 De: Ken Moffat
 Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc 
 blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
 Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 21:10
 On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 02:29:39PM
 -0800, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:

 I purposely have not installed GTK-Doc up to now, and
 it seems to be assumed there by some packages.

   Yes, many packages assume gtk-doc.  I take the view
 that it is
 easier to just install it.

 Agree. Wish the book would agree too, as it is only mentioned as Optional
 in many, e.g. GTK:

 Optional

 Cups-1.6.1, DocBook-utils-0.6.14, gobject-introspection-1.34.1.1 and
 GTK-Doc-1.18

 A note or something could be done.

 It is not required by gegl or dependencies, but it is probable it should
 be as there is explicit mention to it in the install instructions:

 /usr/share/gtk-doc, in
 install -v -m644 docs/*.{css,html} /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl 
 install -d -v -m755 /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images 
 install -v -m644 docs/images/* /usr/share/gtk-doc/html/gegl/images

Perhaps we should promote gtk-doc to recommended, but I can see where 
users really don't care about installing the documentation.  Some 
packages will assume it, but others not.  The only other solution I can 
see is to address the issue package by package as needed.

   -- Bruce

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page