This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
marcusd@cathcart.sysc.pdx.edu (Marcus G. Daniels) writes: > JB> We want to use these doc conventions in Guile itself. The Guile > JB> distribution shouldn't depend on Emacs. > > guile-doc depends on automake and makeinfo to make this happen: > > .texi.info: > @cd $(srcdir) && rm -f $@ $@-[0-9] $@-[0-9][0-9] > cd $(srcdir) \ > && $(MAKEINFO) `echo $< | sed 's,.*/,,'` Hmm, not sure exactly what you mean here... Guile-doc shouldn't require users to have automake installed to do anything. If it does, that's a bug. I think it's okay to require that one have the texinfo tools installed to process texinfo source. That's very different from requiring that Emacs be installed. That is: With nothing but Guile installed, you should be able to: - view docstrings in a readable way from the Guile repl I'm willing to require: - the texinfo tools, if you want to produce texinfo output - texi2html, if you want html output I'm not willing to require: - Emacs - automake That is, if you want output in format FOO, it seems reasonable to require the FOO tools to be installed.