Re: [LTP] [PATCH v4 4/5] Makefile: Update 'doc' target, add 'doc-clean'

[Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>]

Hi Ricardo,

...
> >> Right, I tried out something (below) which kind of works but it would require
> >> the setup target becoming the default... The sad part is that even if
> >> the user chooses not to use a virtualenv, linuxdoc does not seem to be
> >> packaged in the major distros (I checked Tumbleweed, Debian and Fedora
> >> only Fedora has it)

> > I'm surprised that any distro package linuxdoc. And IMHO all linux distros
> > require pip install to run inside virtualenv.


> I was surprise it isn't :(

IMHO kernel developers do very little packaging. And the rest does not care
about (it's not mandatory for building a distro kernel, it's only for publishing
on https://docs.kernel.org/). I would guess quite a lot of kernel maintainers
use Fedora (and Debian) maybe the reason why it's there.

> >> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> >> index 506678934983..69a8016535a9 100644
> >> --- a/Makefile
> >> +++ b/Makefile
> >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ $(1):: | $$(abs_top_builddir)/$$(basename $$(subst -,.,$(1)))
> >>  endif
> >>  endef

> >> -COMMON_TARGETS         += testcases tools metadata
> >> +COMMON_TARGETS         += testcases tools metadata doc

> > I was testing doc part of COMMON_TARGETS as well (that requires that
> > generic_leaf_target.mk to be included). But that means that doc will be always
> > built, which means that user either has linuxdoc and others installed as a
> > package or via 'make -C doc setup'.


> +1

> >>  # Don't want to nuke the original files if we're installing in-build-tree.
> >>  ifneq ($(BUILD_TREE_STATE),$(BUILD_TREE_SRCDIR_INSTALL))
> >> @@ -169,8 +169,8 @@ INSTALL_TARGETS             += $(addprefix $(DESTDIR)/$(bindir)/,$(BINDIR_INSTALL_SCRIPTS))

> >>  $(INSTALL_TARGETS): $(INSTALL_DIR) $(DESTDIR)/$(bindir)

> >> -.PHONY: doc
> >> -doc: metadata-all
> >> +#.PHONY: doc
> >> +#doc: metadata-all

> > 'doc: metadata-all' is a part I suggested to be deleted (useless now).
> > But IMHO it should be replaced by other phony target - my plan was to use
> > generic_leaf_target.mk (reuse existing LTP build system instead writing from
> > scratch), but don't have doc/ part of build from top level Makefile (avoid
> > dealing with virtualenv). Therefore I guess at least doc target in this patchset
> > is more or less correct. Maybe having doc as a part of CLEAN_TARGETS
> > variable will work.

> Adding it to CLEAN_TARGETS will work, as it will create the `doc-clean`
> target.

+1. I hope it creates also doc-distclean (to remove doc/.venv).


> >>  .PHONY: check
> >>  check: $(CHECK_TARGETS)
> >> diff --git a/doc/Makefile b/doc/Makefile
> >> index 2062d6e93561..7f11e659cab8 100644
> >> --- a/doc/Makefile
> >> +++ b/doc/Makefile
> >> @@ -23,15 +23,17 @@ setup: $(VENV_DIR)
> >>  ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json:
> >>         $(MAKE) -C ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata

> >> -all: ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json
> >> +all: ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json setup
> >>         $(RUN_VENV); sphinx-build -b html . html

> > Using virtualenv by default was something which Andrea did not want (equivalent
> > of this was in my v1). And I agree we don't want packagers to deal with
> > virtualenv (FYI atm there are at least SUSE, Buildroot and Yocto packages; Red
> > hat plans to use it as well).


> Hm, but if we have a top-level target "doc" which setup the venv by
> default, it will be even more confusing... Maybe having both doc and
> doc-setup would make sense?

> With this, we can opt-in the venv by doing `make doc-setup` first. We
> can clean it with `make doc-clean` or the top-level `make clean` and
> `make distclean`

It is confusing, but it would be documented.

I wanted top level doc to be as easiest as possible. And generally have top
level targets as simple as possible (shortcuts - go to LTP git directory and
type short make target to have things done):

make -C doc # without venv

make doc # for venv
(shorter than make doc-setup; make doc)

But if you consider it too confusing, it's not that long the targets you
suggest. It'd be nice to have opinion from others.

Kind regards,
Petr

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp