[Spice-devel] [PATCH] Make asciidoc a hard requirement

[Eduardo Lima (Etrunko)]

On 05/04/2016 06:23 AM, Uri Lublin wrote:
> On 05/03/2016 06:36 PM, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/02/2016 07:39 AM, Uri Lublin wrote:
>>>> On 04/26/2016 12:23 AM, Eduardo Lima (Etrunko) wrote:
>>>>> The problem happens when you run 'make dist' in a system without
>>>>> asciidoc installed. Even though in configure time there is a check for
>>>>> building the manual, it is required to be built for distribution.
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I think we should not force building the manual nor require asciidoc
>>>> to build spice-server.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I disagree. The output of make dist should be the same no matter what
>>> system the command is run. Users should have the required dependencies
>>> installed if they are interested in building spice-server from the
>>> source code tarball.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with Eduardo. The make dist should build a tarball containing
>> everything and be the same.
>>
>> However users should also have the option to build spice-server, install
>> it on their system without having to build the documentation.
>>
>> So asciidoc should be required for "make dist" but not "make all" or
>> "make install", despite any possible --enable/disable-manual.
>>
>> Frediano
> 
> I do not see any problem with having to configure with --enable-manual.
> I tried make dist  with --enable-manual and without and the result
> is the same.
> 
> However, --enable-manual is not even needed, as long as asciidoc is
> installed. So it's only required to install asciidoc before running
> make dist (and if you did not and make dist fails just install
> the package and reconfigure).
> 

The thing to notice here is that we are talking about two different
events, one is configure and the other one is make. Make depends on the
results of configure, but there is no way to know, at configure time,
which arguments the make will receive, so the right thing to do is to
prepare for all of them.

Checking for a dependency that will be only used in make dist is wrong
and adds unnecessary maintenance burden in autofoo files which are by
themselves already too complex to mess with.

> I have no problem accepting patches that make "make dist" require
> asciidoc, but I think we should not build the manual by default.
> 

It is possible to have the manual built only for make dist, but I would
still keep asciidoc as a mandatory dependency.

-- 
Eduardo de Barros Lima (Etrunko)
Software Engineer - RedHat
etrunko at redhat.com