Re: Add gtk-doc usage check to autoreconf

Eric Blake <[email protected]> Mon, 28 Jul 2014 12:31:58 -0600

Newsgroups	gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.patches
Organization	Red Hat, Inc.
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On 07/27/2014 05:19 PM, Javier Jardón wrote:
> On 19 August 2012 17:08, Javier Jardón <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From 2f97ab5fed8fc0953d9dbe75c5b45c5b0c410f74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: =?UTF-8?q?Javier=20Jard=C3=B3n?= <[email protected]>
>> Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:59:58 +0900

Wow - 23 months is a long time to wait for a ping; I must admit that the
original patch is no longer in my inbox.

>> @@ -349,6 +351,24 @@ sub autoreconf_current_directory ()
>>
>>
>>    # ------------------- #
>> +  # Running gtkdocize   #
>> +  # ------------------- #
>> +
>> +  if (!$uses_gtkdoc)
>> +    {
>> +      verb "$configure_ac: not using Gtk-Doc";
>> +    }
>> +  elsif (!$install)
>> +    {
>> +      verb "$configure_ac: not running gtkdocize: --install not given";
>> +    }
>> +  else
>> +    {
>> +      xsystem_hint ("gtkdocize is needed because this package uses
>> Gtk-Doc", "$gtkdocize");
>> +    }

The patch has been mangled by mail replies; can you please resend a
fresh version of it to make it easier to apply?

> 
> Hi,
> 
> some time ago I sent the previous patch to add the gtk-doc check upstream.
> I wonder if it can get a review?

How many projects would benefit from having gtk-doc folded in to the
basic autoreconf steps?  I'm not a personal user of such a project, so
I'd like to be pointed to an online git repo of such a project to see
how they are doing things in the meantime without autoreconf's help.

I'm probably okay with the idea, but it needs mention in NEWS and in the
info pages; and once that is done, the patch becomes non-trivial in
size.  Are you okay with assigning copyright to the FSF? If so, I can
work with you off-list to get that going.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 539 B)