[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118
From: |
Greg Troxel |
Subject: |
Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118 |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Feb 2021 11:03:15 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (berkeley-unix) |
"Gary E. Miller" <gem@rellim.com> writes:
>> That works fine. What I meant is a scheme to e.g. generate man pages
>> when making a distfile, and then when building from the distfile using
>> those pre-built man pages if hte tool isn't there.
>
> Are you sure? Please verify your procedure because that should work
> fine.
Probably, what happened is that my previous distfile didn't have them
either because of not having asciidoc* when I made it.
So I did this again. I confirmed that the unpacked tarball has built
man pages and the dates make sense with when I built my tarball:
-rw-r--r-- 1 gdt wheel 33709 Feb 1 18:02 gpsd.8
-rw-r--r-- 1 gdt wheel 31707 Jan 29 11:24 gpsd.adoc
and so on.
After unpacking, I made two changes to my (working with man build)
pkgsrc setup:
In SConscript, look for asciidoctor26fail, so it won't be found
(because that seemed easier than uninstalling it).
pass manbuild=auto
The check for asciidoctor fails, and adoc_prog is Null. Everything
builds but the as-shipped built man pages are not installed and I can
see this in line 2310 of SConscript that the install is conditioned on
the build.
This is what I mean about schemes to maybe build maybe not and install
pre-built things from distfiles being tricky.
When you make a tarball on a system with asciidoctor, and unpack and
build it on a system without, and install, do you get installed man pages?
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, James Browning, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/01
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118,
Greg Troxel <=
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/02
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/02
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/02
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/02
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/02
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/03
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/03
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/05
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Gary E. Miller, 2021/02/05
- Re: ✘asciidoc vs asciidoctor, issue #118, Greg Troxel, 2021/02/05