On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 12:55 -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > From: Yaakov Selkowitz <[email protected]> > > Besides reusing existing code, this allows linuxdoc PDF output to be > enabled or disabled by configure. > > Signed-off-by: Yaakov Selkowitz <[email protected]> > --- > xorg-macros.m4.in | 4 ++-- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xorg-macros.m4.in b/xorg-macros.m4.in > index 916b472..412ee66 100644 > --- a/xorg-macros.m4.in > +++ b/xorg-macros.m4.in > @@ -213,9 +213,9 @@ AC_SUBST(XORG_SGML_PATH) > # with the AM_CONDITIONAL "BUILD_LINUXDOC" > AC_DEFUN([XORG_CHECK_LINUXDOC],[ > AC_REQUIRE([XORG_CHECK_SGML_DOCTOOLS]) > +AC_REQUIRE([XORG_WITH_PS2PDF]) > > AC_PATH_PROG(LINUXDOC, linuxdoc) > -AC_PATH_PROG(PS2PDF, ps2pdf) > > AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to build documentation]) > > @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ AC_MSG_RESULT([$BUILDDOC]) > > AC_MSG_CHECKING([whether to build pdf documentation]) > > -if test x$PS2PDF != x && test x$BUILD_PDFDOC != xno; then > +if test x$have_ps2pdf != xno && test x$BUILD_PDFDOC != xno; then > BUILDPDFDOC=yes > else > BUILDPDFDOC=no
Reviewed-by: Gaetan Nadon <[email protected]> It's not because of your patch, but can you check where BUILD_PDFDOC might be set? It would be too complicated if there were too many switches for the same function.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
