When compiling audio/lash compilation fails because there is ``texi2html --number'' used, but there is no ``--number'' (any more?). ---SCHNIPP--- gmake[3]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/audio/lash/work/lash-0.5.4/docs' if test ! -d lash-manual-html-one-page; then \ mkdir lash-manual-html-one-page; \ fi if test ! -d lash-manual-html-split; then \ mkdir -lash-manual-html-split; \ fi cd lash-manual-html-one-page && \ texi2html --number ../../docs/lash-manual.texi Option number is ambiguous (number-footnotes, number-sections) Try `texi2html --help' for more information. gmake[3]: *** [html-manual-stamp] Error 2 gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/audio/lash/work/lash-0.5.4/docs' gmake[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/audio/lash/work/lash-0.5.4/docs' gmake[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/ports/audio/lash/work/lash-0.5.4' gmake: *** [all] Error 2 *** Error code 1 ---schnapp--- Fix: I have added some patch that generates two patch-files for the port, that simply remove the ``--number'' entries from docs/Makefile.am as well as from docs/Makefile.in as this option has been displaced by ``--number-footnotes!'' and ``--number-sections!'' which both default to ``on'' in version 5.0 of texi2html (see ``texi2html --help'')---further more the error text did mention that ``Option number is ambiguous (number-footnotes, number-sections)''. Patch attached with submission follows: How-To-Repeat: cd /usr/ports/audio/lash make
Responsible Changed From-To: freebsd-ports-bugs->ak I'll take it.
Hi, Kalten I can't reproduce this problem [1], can you please provide more details? [1] https://redports.org/buildarchive/20120705184322-15905/ -- Alex
Hello! > I can't reproduce this problem [1], can you please provide more > details? Well: it did not happen on the tinderbox[1], as that had not installed textproc/texi2html prior to calling the »make configure« part in audio/lash. Because of that you can read the output ---SCHNIPP--- checking for texi2html... no configure: WARNING: texi2html not found, manual will not be built ---schnapp--- for example in the log of 9.0-RELEASE/amd64 [2]. So: to reproduce that especial error---and I apologise for having forgotten to mention this important fact---the textproc/texi2html port has to be installed already when starting the build of audio/lash. I hope, that explained everything. Regards, Kalten [1] https://redports.org/buildarchive/20120705184322-15905/ [2] https://redports.org/~ak0/20120705184322-15905-33343/lash-0.5.4_7.log --
On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 01:27:52AM +0200, Kalten wrote: > Hello! > > > I can't reproduce this problem [1], can you please provide more > > details? > Well: it did not happen on the tinderbox[1], as that had not installed > textproc/texi2html prior to calling the »make configure« part in > audio/lash. Because of that you can read the output > ---SCHNIPP--- > checking for texi2html... no > configure: WARNING: texi2html not found, manual will not be built > ---schnapp--- > for example in the log of 9.0-RELEASE/amd64 [2]. > > So: to reproduce that especial error---and I apologise for having > forgotten to mention this important fact---the textproc/texi2html port > has to be installed already when starting the build of audio/lash. > > I hope, that explained everything. Is it not better then to completely disable building of docs(see patch)? The audio/lash port doesn't install them anyway. Also, can you please explain .if exists devel/readline condition? If readline important, why it's not mandatory, if readline optional, why not use option framework for it? -- Alex
Hello! > Is it not better then to completely disable building of docs(see > patch)? The audio/lash port doesn't install them anyway. Well: you could implement the installation of the docs (maybe some optional knob to let the user decide whether he wants them to be installed) and if it is chosen, automatically depend on texi2html ;-) But a good point, even if the documentations are not to be installed, is, that one can build the port and have a look in its work-directory, whether there happens to be some never installed documentation. > Also, can you please explain .if exists devel/readline condition? If > readline important, why it's not mandatory, if readline optional, why > not use option framework for it? Your thoughts about that sound very reasonable: but it has not been I who has written that Makefile---and I am too busy right now to investigate the matter further. :-( Regards, Kalten --
ak 2012-07-09 14:16:18 UTC FreeBSD ports repository Modified files: audio/lash Makefile Log: - Install manual - Fix texi2hml usage - Remove ABI version numbers in LIB_DEPENDS - Remove leftovers of 5.x support PR: ports/169627 Submitted by: Kalten <kalten@gmx.at> Revision Changes Path 1.20 +20 -8 ports/audio/lash/Makefile _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "cvs-all-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
State Changed From-To: open->closed Committed. Thanks!