|
Hi!
I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building them from the source is preferable). To do that I run make make TYPE=docs (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). and I've found several problems which make build fail: 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or it still requires some unavailable tools? Cheers! -- Sergei Golovan ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Hi Sergei,
we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is to have it work for everyone in R13B04. Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. Regards Lars Sergei Golovan wrote: > Hi! > > I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is > to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building > them from the source is preferable). > > To do that I run > make > make TYPE=docs > (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make > opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). > > and I've found several problems which make build fail: > > 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports > runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 > of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug > in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and > 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) > > 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. > > 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate > XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple > wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd > be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) > > Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or > it still requires some unavailable tools? > > Cheers! ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Hi!
I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make in all doc/src directories works better then trying to run make recursively. pwd=`pwd` for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) done (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached docb_gen script) generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though suffer from runtime errors while running xsltproc. Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with missing and redefined 'docs' targets in makefiles. On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Sergei, > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > > Regards Lars > > > Sergei Golovan wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building >> them from the source is preferable). >> >> To do that I run >> make >> make TYPE=docs >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >> >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >> >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >> >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. >> >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >> >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or >> it still requires some unavailable tools? >> >> Cheers! > > -- Sergei Golovan ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Greetings,
It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok that I do it again. Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if they are the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. bengt On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: > Hi! > > I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make > in all doc/src > directories works better then trying to run make recursively. > > pwd=`pwd` > for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do > (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) > done > > (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached docb_gen script) > generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though suffer from runtime > errors while running xsltproc. > > Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with > missing and redefined > 'docs' targets in makefiles. > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Sergei, > > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it > > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > > > > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is > > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > > > > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > > > > Regards Lars > > > > > > Sergei Golovan wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is > >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building > >> them from the source is preferable). > >> > >> To do that I run > >> make > >> make TYPE=docs > >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make > >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). > >> > >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: > >> > >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports > >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 > >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug > >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and > >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) > >> > >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. > >> > >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate > >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple > >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd > >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) > >> > >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or > >> it still requires some unavailable tools? > >> > >> Cheers! > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh air when I first read it over a decade ago. It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. Mainly it's that the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if you're using make. Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But when I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having everything in one place can be nice. -michael turner On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: >Greetings, > >It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper >"Recursive Make Considered Harmful", >(http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok that I >do it again. > >Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if they are >the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. > > >bengt > >On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make >> in all doc/src >> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. >> >> pwd=`pwd` >> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do >> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) >> done >> >> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached docb_gen script) >> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though suffer from runtime >> errors while running xsltproc. >> >> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with >> missing and redefined >> 'docs' targets in makefiles. >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > Hi Sergei, >> > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it >> > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. >> > >> > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is >> > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. >> > >> > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. >> > >> > Regards Lars >> > >> > >> > Sergei Golovan wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> >> >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is >> >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building >> >> them from the source is preferable). >> >> >> >> To do that I run >> >> make >> >> make TYPE=docs >> >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make >> >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >> >> >> >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >> >> >> >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports >> >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 >> >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug >> >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and >> >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >> >> >> >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. >> >> >> >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate >> >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >> >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd >> >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >> >> >> >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or >> >> it still requires some unavailable tools? >> >> >> >> Cheers! >> > >> > >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________ >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > >________________________________________________________________ >erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
The proposed solution, which you aptly name "horribly inelegant", always
suggests to me that make should be replaced. At least for new things. bengt On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 10:47 +0000, Michael Turner wrote: > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ > > Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this > paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an > Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh air > when I first read it over a decade ago. > > It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. Mainly it's that > the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a > hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if > you're using make. > > Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But when > I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten > while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is > really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having everything in > one place can be nice. > > -michael turner > > On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >Greetings, > > > >It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper > >"Recursive Make Considered Harmful", > >(http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok that I > >do it again. > > > >Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if they are > >the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. > > > > > >bengt > > > >On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make > >> in all doc/src > >> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. > >> > >> pwd=`pwd` > >> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do > >> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) > >> done > >> > >> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached docb_gen script) > >> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though suffer from runtime > >> errors while running xsltproc. > >> > >> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with > >> missing and redefined > >> 'docs' targets in makefiles. > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > Hi Sergei, > >> > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it > >> > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > >> > > >> > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is > >> > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > >> > > >> > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > >> > > >> > Regards Lars > >> > > >> > > >> > Sergei Golovan wrote: > >> >> Hi! > >> >> > >> >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is > >> >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building > >> >> them from the source is preferable). > >> >> > >> >> To do that I run > >> >> make > >> >> make TYPE=docs > >> >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make > >> >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). > >> >> > >> >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: > >> >> > >> >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports > >> >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 > >> >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug > >> >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and > >> >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) > >> >> > >> >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. > >> >> > >> >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate > >> >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple > >> >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd > >> >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) > >> >> > >> >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or > >> >> it still requires some unavailable tools? > >> >> > >> >> Cheers! > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________________________________ > >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > > > > >________________________________________________________________ > >erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
In reply to this post by Michael Turner-7
On 14-Dec-09, at 5:47 AM, Michael Turner wrote: > > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ > > Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this > paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an > Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh > air > when I first read it over a decade ago. > > It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. Right, the problem isn't with 'make' per se, which the paper serves to prove. --Toby > Mainly it's that > the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a > hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if > you're using make. > > Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But > when > I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten > while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is > really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having > everything in > one place can be nice. > > -michael turner > > On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Greetings, >> >> It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper >> "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", >> (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok >> that I >> do it again. >> >> Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if >> they are >> the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. >> >> >> bengt >> >> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make >>> in all doc/src >>> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. >>> >>> pwd=`pwd` >>> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do >>> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) >>> done >>> >>> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached >>> docb_gen script) >>> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though >>> suffer from runtime >>> errors while running xsltproc. >>> >>> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with >>> missing and redefined >>> 'docs' targets in makefiles. >>> >>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Hi Sergei, >>>> we started to build our documentation with open source tools in >>>> R13B03 so it >>>> would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. >>>> >>>> But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to >>>> test it but the plan is >>>> to have it work for everyone in R13B04. >>>> >>>> Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. >>>> >>>> Regards Lars >>>> >>>> >>>> Sergei Golovan wrote: >>>>> Hi! >>>>> >>>>> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the >>>>> goal is >>>>> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as >>>>> building >>>>> them from the source is preferable). >>>>> >>>>> To do that I run >>>>> make >>>>> make TYPE=docs >>>>> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace >>>>> "make >>>>> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >>>>> >>>>> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >>>>> >>>>> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc >>>>> reports >>>>> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 >>>>> and 963 >>>>> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this >>>>> a bug >>>>> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian >>>>> stable and >>>>> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >>>>> >>>>> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its >>>>> makefile. >>>>> >>>>> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to >>>>> generate >>>>> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >>>>> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, >>>>> but It'd >>>>> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >>>>> >>>>> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the >>>>> source, or >>>>> it still requires some unavailable tools? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers! >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ________________________________________________________________ >>> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >>> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________ >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org >> >> > > ________________________________________________________________ > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Greetings,
Perhaps I am mistaken, but I think the solution presented in the paper, while being better than recursive make, is cumbersome and fragile. So I would say that make is lacking, once the project leaves a single directory. bengt On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:07 -0500, Toby Thain wrote: > On 14-Dec-09, at 5:47 AM, Michael Turner wrote: > > > > > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ > > > > Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this > > paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an > > Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh > > air > > when I first read it over a decade ago. > > > > It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. > > Right, the problem isn't with 'make' per se, which the paper serves > to prove. > > --Toby > > > Mainly it's that > > the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a > > hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if > > you're using make. > > > > Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But > > when > > I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten > > while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is > > really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having > > everything in > > one place can be nice. > > > > -michael turner > > > > On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > >> Greetings, > >> > >> It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper > >> "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", > >> (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok > >> that I > >> do it again. > >> > >> Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if > >> they are > >> the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. > >> > >> > >> bengt > >> > >> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: > >>> Hi! > >>> > >>> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make > >>> in all doc/src > >>> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. > >>> > >>> pwd=`pwd` > >>> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do > >>> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) > >>> done > >>> > >>> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached > >>> docb_gen script) > >>> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though > >>> suffer from runtime > >>> errors while running xsltproc. > >>> > >>> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with > >>> missing and redefined > >>> 'docs' targets in makefiles. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> Hi Sergei, > >>>> we started to build our documentation with open source tools in > >>>> R13B03 so it > >>>> would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > >>>> > >>>> But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to > >>>> test it but the plan is > >>>> to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > >>>> > >>>> Regards Lars > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Sergei Golovan wrote: > >>>>> Hi! > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the > >>>>> goal is > >>>>> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as > >>>>> building > >>>>> them from the source is preferable). > >>>>> > >>>>> To do that I run > >>>>> make > >>>>> make TYPE=docs > >>>>> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace > >>>>> "make > >>>>> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). > >>>>> > >>>>> and I've found several problems which make build fail: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc > >>>>> reports > >>>>> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 > >>>>> and 963 > >>>>> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this > >>>>> a bug > >>>>> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian > >>>>> stable and > >>>>> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its > >>>>> makefile. > >>>>> > >>>>> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to > >>>>> generate > >>>>> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple > >>>>> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, > >>>>> but It'd > >>>>> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) > >>>>> > >>>>> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the > >>>>> source, or > >>>>> it still requires some unavailable tools? > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers! > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________________________________________ > >>> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >>> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________________________________ > >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > >> > >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
On 12/15/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: >Perhaps I am mistaken, but I think the solution presented in the paper, >while being better than recursive make, is cumbersome and fragile. So I >would say that make is lacking, once the project leaves a single >directory. What do you mean by "leaves a single directory?" The only interpretation I can think of is: "has source files in more than one directory." Whatever the demerits of the approach suggested, it's clearly not limited to single-directory builds. It's a way to have one big makefile (composed of some fragments of makefiles in subdirectories) for something you're building in several directories. From the beginning of the Implementation Notes: "The most basic problem to overcome when implementing single-session make is to avoid flattening your directory structure, while joining the dependency information present in each subdirectory in a single tree." So what did you mean by "leaves a single directory"? -michael turner >On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:07 -0500, Toby Thain wrote: >> On 14-Dec-09, at 5:47 AM, Michael Turner wrote: >> >> > >> > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ >> > >> > Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this >> > paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an >> > Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh >> > air >> > when I first read it over a decade ago. >> > >> > It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. >> >> Right, the problem isn't with 'make' per se, which the paper serves >> to prove. >> >> --Toby >> >> > Mainly it's that >> > the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a >> > hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if >> > you're using make. >> > >> > Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But >> > when >> > I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten >> > while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is >> > really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having >> > everything in >> > one place can be nice. >> > >> > -michael turner >> > >> > On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > >> >> Greetings, >> >> >> >> It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper >> >> "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", >> >> (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok >> >> that I >> >> do it again. >> >> >> >> Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if >> >> they are >> >> the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. >> >> >> >> >> >> bengt >> >> >> >> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: >> >>> Hi! >> >>> >> >>> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make >> >>> in all doc/src >> >>> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. >> >>> >> >>> pwd=`pwd` >> >>> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do >> >>> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) >> >>> done >> >>> >> >>> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached >> >>> docb_gen script) >> >>> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though >> >>> suffer from runtime >> >>> errors while running xsltproc. >> >>> >> >>> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with >> >>> missing and redefined >> >>> 'docs' targets in makefiles. >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>>> Hi Sergei, >> >>>> we started to build our documentation with open source tools in >> >>>> R13B03 so it >> >>>> would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. >> >>>> >> >>>> But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to >> >>>> test it but the plan is >> >>>> to have it work for everyone in R13B04. >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. >> >>>> >> >>>> Regards Lars >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Sergei Golovan wrote: >> >>>>> Hi! >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the >> >>>>> goal is >> >>>>> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as >> >>>>> building >> >>>>> them from the source is preferable). >> >>>>> >> >>>>> To do that I run >> >>>>> make >> >>>>> make TYPE=docs >> >>>>> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace >> >>>>> "make >> >>>>> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >> >>>>> >> >>>>> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc >> >>>>> reports >> >>>>> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 >> >>>>> and 963 >> >>>>> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this >> >>>>> a bug >> >>>>> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian >> >>>>> stable and >> >>>>> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its >> >>>>> makefile. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to >> >>>>> generate >> >>>>> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >> >>>>> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, >> >>>>> but It'd >> >>>>> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the >> >>>>> source, or >> >>>>> it still requires some unavailable tools? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Cheers! >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ________________________________________________________________ >> >>> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> >>> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org >> >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________ >> >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org >> >> >> >> >> > >> > ________________________________________________________________ >> > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org >> > >> > > >________________________________________________________________ >erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Greetings,
Perhaps you would consider moving this off the list? I do not think my meager experience with non-recursive make warrants much more than the link to the paper. However, you are spot on. I did mean "has source files in more than one directory." You are also correct in stating that the paper describes how to have one large makefile for several directories. My comments where intended to convey the following basic statements: - Recursive make can be viewed as sub-optimal due to the reason put forth in the paper. - Non-recursive make I found to be sub-optimal due to it being cumbersome and fragile. And my thus conclusion: - make is lacking, once the project has source files in more than one directory. bengt > On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 10:14 +0000, Michael Turner wrote: > > On 12/15/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >Perhaps I am mistaken, but I think the solution presented in the paper, > >while being better than recursive make, is cumbersome and fragile. So I > >would say that make is lacking, once the project leaves a single > >directory. > > What do you mean by "leaves a single directory?" The only > interpretation I can think of is: "has source files in more than one > directory." Whatever the demerits of the approach suggested, it's > clearly not limited to single-directory builds. It's a way to have one > big makefile (composed of some fragments of makefiles in subdirectories) > for something you're building in several directories. > > From the beginning of the Implementation Notes: > > "The most basic problem to overcome when implementing single-session > make is to avoid flattening your directory structure, while joining the > dependency information present in each subdirectory in a single tree." > > So what did you mean by "leaves a single directory"? > > -michael turner > > >On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:07 -0500, Toby Thain wrote: > >> On 14-Dec-09, at 5:47 AM, Michael Turner wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ > >> > > >> > Thanks for this. I wasn't on the list when you first mentioned this > >> > paper. I vaguely remembered just such a paper while trying to build an > >> > Erlang release a few months ago. It struck me as a breath of fresh > >> > air > >> > when I first read it over a decade ago. > >> > > >> > It's not so much that "make" is lacking, I think. > >> > >> Right, the problem isn't with 'make' per se, which the paper serves > >> to prove. > >> > >> --Toby > >> > >> > Mainly it's that > >> > the obvious approach (recursion) for building stuff out of a > >> > hierarchical directory structure is not necessarily the best way if > >> > you're using make. > >> > > >> > Having one big makefile seems, of course, horribly inelegant. But > >> > when > >> > I've tried that approach, it always reminds me of things I'd forgotten > >> > while using big, lumbering, recursive build systems. Like, make is > >> > really fast. Compilers are pretty fast, too. And having > >> > everything in > >> > one place can be nice. > >> > > >> > -michael turner > >> > > >> > On 12/14/2009, "Bengt Kleberg" <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Greetings, > >> >> > >> >> It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper > >> >> "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", > >> >> (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok > >> >> that I > >> >> do it again. > >> >> > >> >> Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if > >> >> they are > >> >> the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> bengt > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: > >> >>> Hi! > >> >>> > >> >>> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make > >> >>> in all doc/src > >> >>> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. > >> >>> > >> >>> pwd=`pwd` > >> >>> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do > >> >>> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) > >> >>> done > >> >>> > >> >>> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached > >> >>> docb_gen script) > >> >>> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though > >> >>> suffer from runtime > >> >>> errors while running xsltproc. > >> >>> > >> >>> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with > >> >>> missing and redefined > >> >>> 'docs' targets in makefiles. > >> >>> > >> >>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> >>>> Hi Sergei, > >> >>>> we started to build our documentation with open source tools in > >> >>>> R13B03 so it > >> >>>> would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to > >> >>>> test it but the plan is > >> >>>> to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Regards Lars > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Sergei Golovan wrote: > >> >>>>> Hi! > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the > >> >>>>> goal is > >> >>>>> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as > >> >>>>> building > >> >>>>> them from the source is preferable). > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> To do that I run > >> >>>>> make > >> >>>>> make TYPE=docs > >> >>>>> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace > >> >>>>> "make > >> >>>>> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> and I've found several problems which make build fail: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc > >> >>>>> reports > >> >>>>> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 > >> >>>>> and 963 > >> >>>>> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this > >> >>>>> a bug > >> >>>>> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian > >> >>>>> stable and > >> >>>>> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its > >> >>>>> makefile. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to > >> >>>>> generate > >> >>>>> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple > >> >>>>> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, > >> >>>>> but It'd > >> >>>>> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the > >> >>>>> source, or > >> >>>>> it still requires some unavailable tools? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Cheers! > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> ________________________________________________________________ > >> >>> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >> >>> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ________________________________________________________________ > >> >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >> >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > ________________________________________________________________ > >> > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >> > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > >> > > >> > > > > > >________________________________________________________________ > >erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > >erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
In reply to this post by Bengt Kleberg
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Bengt Kleberg
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Greetings, > > It has been well over a year since last time I mentioned this paper > "Recursive Make Considered Harmful", > (http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/). so I hope it is ok that I > do it again. > > Nice little reading for those that find themselves wondering if they are > the only ones that think make is somewhat lacking, at times. For anyone interested there is http://code.google.com/p/erlang-t-build/ Which provides non-recursive make for erlang projects /Anders > > > bengt > > On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 13:02 +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I did some further investigations and found that simply calling make >> in all doc/src >> directories works better then trying to run make recursively. >> >> pwd=`pwd` >> for i in `find . -wholename '*/doc/src'` ; do >> (cd $i ; make man ERL_TOP=$pwd ) >> done >> >> (using Erlang R12B-02-1 edoc and docbuilder, and the attached docb_gen script) >> generates manpages perfectly, make html and make pdf though suffer from runtime >> errors while running xsltproc. >> >> Running make recursively reveals a whole bunch of problems with >> missing and redefined >> 'docs' targets in makefiles. >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > Hi Sergei, >> > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it >> > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. >> > >> > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is >> > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. >> > >> > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. >> > >> > Regards Lars >> > >> > >> > Sergei Golovan wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> >> >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is >> >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building >> >> them from the source is preferable). >> >> >> >> To do that I run >> >> make >> >> make TYPE=docs >> >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make >> >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >> >> >> >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >> >> >> >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports >> >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 >> >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug >> >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and >> >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >> >> >> >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. >> >> >> >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate >> >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >> >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd >> >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >> >> >> >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or >> >> it still requires some unavailable tools? >> >> >> >> Cheers! >> > >> > >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________________________ >> erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html >> erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > > ________________________________________________________________ > erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html > erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org > > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
In reply to this post by Lars Thorsen
Hi again!
It seems that XSLT stylesheets which were used to generate Erlang R13B03 manpages are a bit buggy. The main problem is that in the generated manpages lines often start with dot (.) or apostrophe ('). These characters start groff macros, so some info will be lost after manpage formatting. Also, tools like apropos don't understand the APPLICATION or MODULE sections and try to find the NAME one. Another minor bug is incorrect authors information formatting. The attached patch simply makes xsltproc add \& before all dot and apostrophe symbols, and replaces MODULE by NAME header, and adds some authors processing. To check for bugs the following command can be used: LANG=C MANWIDTH=80 man --warnings -l filename.3 >/dev/null On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Sergei, > we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it > would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. > > But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is > to have it work for everyone in R13B04. > > Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. > > Regards Lars > > > Sergei Golovan wrote: >> Hi! >> >> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is >> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building >> them from the source is preferable). >> >> To do that I run >> make >> make TYPE=docs >> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make >> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >> >> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >> >> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports >> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 >> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug >> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and >> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >> >> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. >> >> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate >> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd >> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >> >> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or >> it still requires some unavailable tools? >> >> Cheers! > > -- Sergei Golovan ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Hi again!
And another issue with Erlang manpages: Erlang places manpages for its config files into section 4 and application descriptions into section 6. Though man manual says that section 4 is for "special files (usually found in /dev)" and section 6 is for "games" (?!). I'd say that config files manpages are to be in section 5 "file formats and conventions" and applications - in section 7 (just don't fit any other section). Would it be too hard to move manpages across sections (This will require some minor changes to Erlang mode as well)? Or Erlang users expect them in sections 4 and 6, so they couldn't find them elsewhere? On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Sergei Golovan <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi again! > > It seems that XSLT stylesheets which were used to generate Erlang > R13B03 manpages are a bit buggy. The main problem is that in the > generated manpages lines often start with dot (.) or apostrophe ('). > These characters start groff macros, so some info will be lost after > manpage formatting. > > Also, tools like apropos don't understand the APPLICATION or MODULE > sections and try to find the NAME one. > > Another minor bug is incorrect authors information formatting. > > The attached patch simply makes xsltproc add \& before all dot and > apostrophe symbols, and replaces MODULE by NAME header, and adds some > authors processing. > > To check for bugs the following command can be used: > LANG=C MANWIDTH=80 man --warnings -l filename.3 >/dev/null > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:16 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi Sergei, >> we started to build our documentation with open source tools in R13B03 so it >> would be possible to build the doc from the delivered sources. >> >> But it's still only built in house because we hadn't time to test it but the plan is >> to have it work for everyone in R13B04. >> >> Thanks for your report, we'll have a look at those fault. >> >> Regards Lars >> >> >> Sergei Golovan wrote: >>> Hi! >>> >>> I'm trying to build Erlang documentation from the sources (the goal is >>> to switch from prebuilt docs for Debian Erlang packages as building >>> them from the source is preferable). >>> >>> To do that I run >>> make >>> make TYPE=docs >>> (in fact, make libs doesn't recognize TYPE, so I had to replace "make >>> opt" by "make $(TYPE) in the top-level Makefile). >>> >>> and I've found several problems which make build fail: >>> >>> 1) For some XML files (e.g. erts/docs/src/book.xml) xsltproc reports >>> runtime errors about undefined variables (partnum in line 871 and 963 >>> of db_pdf.xsl, in lines 1075 and 1173 of db_html.xsl). Is this a bug >>> in the stylesheets or in xsltproc? (Both 1.1.24 from Debian stable and >>> 1.1.26 from Debian unstable failed.) >>> >>> 2) wx application has duplicated targets html and docs in its makefile. >>> >>> 3) wx application (and others too) require docb_gen script to generate >>> XML docs sources. It is missing. (I suppose that it is a simple >>> wrapper around docb_gen Erlang module and could be recreated, but It'd >>> be better if it were shipped in Erlang sources.) >>> >>> Is Erlang documentation supposed to be buildable from the source, or >>> it still requires some unavailable tools? >>> >>> Cheers! >> >> > > > > -- > Sergei Golovan > -- Sergei Golovan ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
|
Hi Sergei, someone in the beginning of OTP history decided to place them there and I don' remember why. I don't know if Erlang users expect them to be there but they have at least got used to it :). I think your suggestion is appropriate and we'll look at it but I don't know if we change. Regards Lars Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB Sergei Golovan wrote: > Hi again! > > And another issue with Erlang manpages: > > Erlang places manpages for its config files into section 4 and > application descriptions into section 6. Though man manual says that > section 4 is for "special files (usually found in /dev)" and section 6 > is for "games" (?!). > > I'd say that config files manpages are to be in section 5 "file > formats and conventions" and applications - in section 7 (just don't > fit any other section). > > Would it be too hard to move manpages across sections (This will > require some minor changes to Erlang mode as well)? Or Erlang users > expect them in sections 4 and 6, so they couldn't find them elsewhere? > ________________________________________________________________ erlang-bugs mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html erlang-bugs (at) erlang.org |
| Powered by Nabble | Edit this page |
