[PATCH] classes/sanity: remove texi2html from required host utilities

[PATCH] classes/sanity: remove texi2html from required host utilities

[Paul Eggleton]

texi2html is not actually required to build world of OE-Core anymore,
so we don't need to mandate it. The only difference without it (verified
with buildhistory) is that groff doesn't produce HTML documentation; the
rest of its docs are still produced and packaged and no other packages
are affected.

Part of the work towards [YOCTO #2423].

Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
---
 meta/classes/sanity.bbclass |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
index 575ce15..ff7c73b 100644
--- a/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
+++ b/meta/classes/sanity.bbclass
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 # Sanity check the users setup for common misconfigurations
 #
 
-SANITY_REQUIRED_UTILITIES ?= "patch diffstat texi2html makeinfo git bzip2 tar gzip gawk chrpath wget cpio"
+SANITY_REQUIRED_UTILITIES ?= "patch diffstat makeinfo git bzip2 tar gzip gawk chrpath wget cpio"
 
 def raise_sanity_error(msg, d):
     if d.getVar("SANITY_USE_EVENTS", True) == "1":
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH] classes/sanity: remove texi2html from required host utilities

[Phil Blundell]

On Mon, 2012-08-20 at 09:47 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> texi2html is not actually required to build world of OE-Core anymore,
> so we don't need to mandate it. The only difference without it (verified
> with buildhistory) is that groff doesn't produce HTML documentation; the
> rest of its docs are still produced and packaged and no other packages
> are affected.

Can we fix groff to make it not even try to use texi2html even if it's
installed?  It seems a bit undesirable for the amount of documentation
you get to vary depending on the host environment.

p.

Re: [PATCH] classes/sanity: remove texi2html from required host utilities

[Paul Eggleton]

On Monday 20 August 2012 09:48:20 Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-08-20 at 09:47 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > texi2html is not actually required to build world of OE-Core anymore,
> > so we don't need to mandate it. The only difference without it (verified
> > with buildhistory) is that groff doesn't produce HTML documentation; the
> > rest of its docs are still produced and packaged and no other packages
> > are affected.
> 
> Can we fix groff to make it not even try to use texi2html even if it's
> installed?  It seems a bit undesirable for the amount of documentation
> you get to vary depending on the host environment.

Actually, upon closer inspection, texi2html has nothing to do with this. The 
host needs to have pnmcut, pnmcrop, pnmtopng, psselect, pnmtops and gs 
installed or neither the HTML nor PDF backends for groff will be enabled.

This leaves us with two alternatives:

1) Make groff depend on ghostscript, and that would at least enable the PDF 
backend, but for HTML it still leaves netpbm (for pnm*) and psutils (for 
psselect), neither of which we have in OE-Core.

2) Alternatively I can add --without-gs to the groff configure options which 
will always disable both backends.

Cheers,
Paul

-- 

Paul Eggleton
Intel Open Source Technology Centre