Re: INSTALL file. Comments.

[Dave Pawson]

On 09/09/2007, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@web.de> wrote:
>
> Am 09.09.2007 um 16:29 schrieb Dave Pawson:
>
> > <URL:http://openlab.ring.gr.jp/efont/> (packaged in Debian).
> > Ditto, no mention of a debian package.
>
> There are volunteers on the net that provide lists of packages of
> this or that format for this or that flavour or version of some Linux
> distribution. Do you have an idea how many GNU Emacs packages of only
> one GNU Emacs version might exist?

Please don't infer what I have not written.
I stated that the document was incorrect. What inferences you make is
your issue.
If you wish to tell readers to seek a package for the fonts, say so.
It is factually wrong.


> >
> > General comment re fonts: No intimation of how emacs finds fonts,
> > nor how they should be installed, either within the emacs code
> > or how they are accessed from the system font locations.
>
> X11. Unless otherwise stated (MS Windows variants, Mac OS variants,
> GEM, AmigaOS ... "Unicode Emacs").

This information is omitted from the document.
It would be helpful IMHO.


>
> >
> > If you don't want X support, specify `--with-x=no'.  If you omit this
> > option, `configure' will try to figure out for itself whether your
> > system has X, and arrange to use it if present.
> >
> > Not strictly true? X is only used if the dev libraries are present?
> > My (as built) system had X, but no dev libraries.
>
> There are no dev libraries, at least I haven't found any, except when
> built for a special purpose (profiled, with extended debug content,
> for static linkage). Libraries are mostly shared libraries that are
> loaded once into memory and then used by a handful of programmes or
> applications at the same or at a different time.

The document tells half a tale. I'd suggest that the user needs
to be informed that 'some' libraries are needed for X support.




> >
> > quote.
> > To get more attractive menus, you can specify an X toolkit when you
> > configure Emacs; use the option `--with-x-toolkit=TOOLKIT',
> >
> > Is that the whole story? Isn't it for more than 'attractive menus'?
> > I.e. since there is no default (mentioned in INSTALL) am I right
> > in thinking I'll build the nox version without this option?
>
> There aren't so many other differences visible. Now that you know how
> to get and install necessary packages and how to configure and
> compile GNU Emacs you can create variants based on GTK, OSF/Motif
> (Lesstif), without Xaw3d, or using OpenLook (from Sun) ...

"Now that I know" being the operative phrase?
I'm reviewing this as a user who doesn't know, I.e. as I first came to it.


>
> >
> > Says, Use --without-sound to disable sound support.
> > No mention of the --with-sound=yes option that was mentioned
> > by a couple of people?
>
> ./configure --help gives a helpful general hint that --with-
> something=no can mean the same as --without-something. A look inside
> the configure script, or running it as in 'sh -x ./configure ...' can
> give some insight.

Again my comment was against the document. It informs of a negative
option. IMHO it should document the positive one too to inform the user.
There is no mention of, for instance, we expect you to be familiar with
configure options.


>
> >
> > quote.
> > If the description of the system configuration printed by `configure'
> > is not right, or if it claims some of the features or libraries are
> > not
> > available when you know they are, look at the `config.log' file for
> > the trace of the failed tests performed by `configure' to check
> > whether these features are supported.
> >
> > This doesn't cover the case where the libraries are missing?
>
> It does.

My experience is that it does not.


>
> > Perhaps a note to indicate, for instance, what to look for
> > when configure failed to find a library?
>
> This is exactly indicated by configure's use of a set of two letters:
> 'no.'

I'd suggest the caveat is 'if you've been there and done that'.
Interpreting the no is a whole new ball game.


>
> > Or even a simple statement, that, for instance 'nox will be built,
> > since no X headers found' or some such?
>
> That's as clear as in 'when the sun is not found shining, it's not
> bright outside.' Then it's night (mostly). A natural state. (The
> other case is a natural state, too.)

In which case tell the user what the 'natural state' is.



> > Does this mean that having built it, I can delete SOURCE-DIR
> > completely?
>
> ... it is needed. The compiler reads the C source files from the
> original directory and only puts its output into the new side
> directory. (Carbon Emacs for Mac OS X won't be compiled because the
> free Darwin OS does not contain the proprietary Carbon API. Darwin
> uses X11 as windowing system.)

But post make it can be deleted? Space saver?
Unclear IMHO



> >
> > quote.
> > 7) Run `make' in the top directory of the Emacs distribution
> > This isn't true if I've run configure from another directory?
> > Suggest  "Run 'make' from the directory in which you ran 'configure'"
> >
>
> Somehow 'going to school' also includes visiting a college – at least
> in the U.S.A.

The document is incorrect and has nowt to do with the us.



>
>
> It would make more sense to describe how to create a (local) package
> from the compiled software.


Possibly. I wouldn't know Peter.



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk