Re: Gtk-OSX

On 06/09/10 21:39, John Ralls wrote:

On Sep 6, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Stefan Kost wrote:

I think I heard somewhere that you have a kind of dummy gtk-doc to
satisfy the build deps. I wonder if we can fix this somehow better.
Can you either ping me in #gtkdoc (gimpnet-irc), write to gtk-doc
mailing list or even to me in person and describe the problem. Also
let me know where I can look at the dummy package that you are

The dummy gtk-doc I used a while back was stolen from Tor's work to get Evolution going on Windows:

No, it's gnome-doc-utils that's faked to satisfy the build deps,
along with a package of DocBook DTDs (that the real gnome-doc-utils
would provide if it wasn't faked). I thought that it had to do with
not wanting to deal with scrollkeeper, but that doesn't seem to have
anything to do with gnome-doc-utils. At this point, I don't really
know why it's there; perhaps one of the Lanedo folks still here knows
or can find out from Richard Hult. I'll experiment with just using
the real gnome-doc-utils instead.

As I recall (and this is from my Windows building GTK+ experience a while back now), the reason was because / configure.{ac|in} include gtk-doc m4 macros and so you have to have gtk-doc installed in some capacity to actually get the build working.

Personally, I hate this. I have always thought that gtk-doc should be build time optional and not in the sense that you disable building project documentation but rather that you don't need any part of gtk-doc to actually make your build work.

If I am out of date on any of these matters, then I will happily accept corrections :)

If it works, then
gnome-doc-utils-fake and gtk-osx-docbook can go away. If it doesn't,
then when time permits I'll see about fixing it. It doesn't look like
either gnome-doc-utils-fake or gtk-osx-docbook should migrate to

I would rather fix gtk-doc.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]