From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] docs/build: Move install checks into
 individual build targets
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:55:05 +0100
Message-ID: <553664C9.1010601@citrix.com>
References: <1429526966-18874-1-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<1429526966-18874-7-git-send-email-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
	<553505C90200007800073BB5@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<5534EA95.6080107@citrix.com> <1429625711.4743.111.camel@citrix.com>
	<553678700200007800074598@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<1429626187.4743.114.camel@citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1429626187.4743.114.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: IanJackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 21/04/15 15:23, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 15:18 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 21.04.15 at 16:15, <ian.campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 13:01 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 20/04/15 12:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 20.04.15 at 12:49, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -103,12 +88,20 @@ install: install-man-pages install-html
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>  # Individual file build targets
>>>>>>  man1/%.1: man/%.pod.1 Makefile
>>>>>> +ifdef POD2MAN
>>>>> Perhaps better to use ifneq($(POD2MAN),) in such cases?
>>>> I was following the prevailing style, but can update all instances. 
>>>> FWIW, it is not currently an issue.
>>> I don't really mind, ifneq seems more prevalent in other makefiles, I'm
>>> not sure why this one uses ifdef nor really what the implications are.
>> The difference becomes visible when the variable is defined but
>> expands to nothing. And I view it as more useful if as empty
>> variable means "none" than if that results in presumably very
>> strange build errors.
> True. Andy, will you fix these up then?

Yes - will fix in v2.

~Andrew