Re: Make perl & examples optional
Kaz Kylheku <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.parsers.bison.bugs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2020-09-06 09:13, Akim Demaille wrote: > Hi Thomas, > >> Le 6 sept. 2020 à 16:41, Thomas Deutschmann <[email protected]> a >> écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> in Gentoo Linux we are carrying the following patch for quite some >> time >> to make perl dependency which is required for examples optional. >> >> Any chance to get this applied upstream? > > I don't see how Perl is needed. I do not mean Perl to be required, > so you'll have to be more specific on why you think it is. > > Besides, if I spent so much time providing users with examples, it > is clearly not to see them removed by the distro. These examples are > part of the package, and must be treated like documentation. I'd like to add that the examples are compiled and executed as test cases during "make check". The --disable-tests option provided by this patch completely unhooks these programs from being built and tested by "make check". Thus if/when Gentoo runs "make check", those things are not being tested. The main test suite still runs, but Bison is being tested just a little less by the omission of the examples. (They take very little extra time.) If the problem is that the examples are being *installed* somewhere, then the patching approach is puzzling. Doesn't Gentoo have a mechanism, like a typical distro, for selecting files from the temporary install directory, to go into different kinds of packages: main, devel, doc, extras, ... Surely, Akim's "must be treated like documentation" can be interpreted as exactly that: the examples go into some bison-doc package? Under what circumstances can a distro not remove unwanted material from the package in its packaging post-processing, but have to resort to patching the build steps of that package?