Rockbox

This is the bug/patch tracker for Rockbox. Click here for more information.

Quick links: Bugs · Patches · Rockbox frontpage

Tasklist

FS#8567 - Generate list of features to enable in manuals from features.txt

Attached to Project: Rockbox
Opened by Nils Wallménius (nls) - Saturday, 09 February 2008, 13:31 GMT+2
Last edited by Nils Wallménius (nls) - Wednesday, 13 February 2008, 18:15 GMT+2
Task Type Patches
Category Build environment
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Player Type All players
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version Daily build (which?)
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Private No

Details

This patch parses the features.txt file to create a list of features to enable in the manuals similar to the features list used by genlang.
This eases the maintenance cost of keeping all manuals up to date with the latest code changes.

To actually use this, a bit of search&replace is needed in the manual since these new option commands are not named the same as the ones in the current platform file.

One possible problem that I would like input on is that now a "make manual" is needed to actually build a manual, just "make" will make a regular build (just like you have to use "make voice" to build a voicefile) I don't know if this is a problem for anybody?
The reason for this change is that correct include paths are needed now to find all header files.
   manual_features.diff (2.1 KiB) 
 manual/preamble.tex |    1 +
 manual/Makefile     |   16 +++++++++++++++-
 tools/configure     |    3 ---
 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

This task depends upon

Closed by  Nils Wallménius (nls)
Wednesday, 13 February 2008, 18:15 GMT+2
Reason for closing:  Accepted
Comment by Nils Wallménius (nls) - Saturday, 09 February 2008, 13:38 GMT+2
Remove debug echo
   manual_features2.diff (2.1 KiB) 
 manual/preamble.tex |    1 +
 manual/Makefile     |   15 ++++++++++++++-
 tools/configure     |    3 ---
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Comment by Dominik Riebeling (bluebrother) - Saturday, 09 February 2008, 20:15 GMT+2
I don't think it would be an issue to require "make manual" to be run explicitly -- IMO we could drop the configuration target "manual" completely and use the standard build configuration instead. The only drawback I see is that building the manual now requires gcc to be present. OTOH at least I wouldn't mind that dependency.

Loading...