[Scons-dev] New SCons doc toolchain...

[Dirk Bächle]

Hi Bill,

On 29.04.2013 21:51, William Deegan wrote:

> All,

>

> I see the following when running bootstrap.py

>

> SCons import failed. Trying to run from source directory

> scons: Reading SConscript files ...

> scons: done reading SConscript files.

> scons: Building targets ...

> scons: `.' is up to date.

> scons: done building targets.

> [...]

>


looks like you ran all the single SConstructs in the "doc/*" folders 
before. So everything is up to date...


> Also I had to install the following (on ubuntu 10.04)

>   sudo apt-get install python-libxml2 

> python-libxslt1 python-epydoc fop python2.6-dev

>


That's what I would have expected...


> Note that without the proper tools installed the build failed 

> complaining about scons.1 missing.

> Would it be possible to allow bootstrap.py to complete skipping the 

> parts which won't build due to missing tools?

>

> I don't remember if that's what we did before.

>


Before this, there were checks for the single command-line tools like 
"jw", and several others.
I can add a check to the main SConstruct, trying to import the 
lxml/libxml2 bindings and skipping the docs if none of them can be found.


> Also, probably a good idea to update: bin/scons_dev_master.py  to have 

> an updated list of tools needed would be great.

>


I'll correct that, based on the list for Ubuntu above...


> [...]

>

>

> What would be the advantage of this then? Sorry that I have to ask, 

> but some of the XML files use hard-coded paths to include the 

> generated lists of tools and builders, for example. That's why this 

> task might not be trivial...

>> I'd also like to still be able and simply call SCons from the 

>> "doc/user" or "doc/man" folder itself, while editing documents.

>

> Seems reasonable that the build products would go in the build dir.

> I believe that's been the case up to now.

>

> Typically when I'm working on such, I may do a rm -rf build, and then 

> rebuild to make sure the clean build doesn't have issues.

>


I see the point and will try to rearrange things a bit. For keeping the 
same level in the folder hierarchy I'd like to install the doc sources 
to "build/doc_src_man" and "build/doc_src_user", respectively. Would 
that be okay?

Dirk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://two.pairlist.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20130430/8e3caa6f/attachment.html>