Re: [Nbd] Compiling on OS-X

[Wouter Verhelst <w@...112...>]

On Sun, Apr 03, 2016 at 04:31:46PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> These appear to be completely different programs. I can't find the latter in brew.

They are.

> So
> 
> 1. Has anyone got this to compile with OS-X?

I'm not sure.

First and foremost, note that they're docbook-sgml rather than
docbook-xml. The former doesn't have the uppercase requirement that you
spoke of earlier; it may be that docbook2x defaults to docbook-xml and
that you just need to install the SGML version of docbook (which is not
installed by default in many cases anymore these days) to fix it.

> 2. Is there a reason we make man-pages etc. at autogen.sh time, rather
> than post ./configure, where we could check whether docbook2man works?

This one :-)

I ship a release tarball with the manpages already precompiled (so we
don't have that issue at compile time of a release tarball), but I don't
want to commit them to git (because committing generated files to git is
evil). That means the Makefile logic must treat them differently from
other files, otherwise they would get rebuilt when they don't need to
be. When I last looked at this, the implication of that was that their
files must exist at autoreconf time, and while I tried, I couldn't find
a way around that requirement.

Note though that I said "the files must exist", not "the files must be
valid". If you want to just do a test build of the code, you can create
them with "touch" and be done with it.

-- 
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
       people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
       and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
 -- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12