Re: [git 17e68b85] make error in documentation

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 06:08:35PM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > As for (b), I wanted to add png versions:
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-08/msg00730.html
> > but I've been told off in the past for adding files that could be
> > added automatically.
> 
> Basically, I agree, but the case of SVG is quite problematic since it
> relies on external fonts at certain locations.  In particular,
> `annotated-demo.svg'

We don't use annotated-demo.svg.  I already asked Patrick to
change the fonts in the text-*.svg files to match whatever I had
on a newly installed Debian box, in the hopes that those fonts
would be generic enough that they'd be found everywhere.
(I think he said that "Deja something" looked good... he certainly
changed the fonts)

annotated-demo.svg should probably be deleted, but since I wasn't
the person to add it, I'm reluctant to do this without knowing why
it was added.

> >> [Shouldn't the SVG->PNG Makefile rule be disabled, and perhaps
> >> moving the SVG images to a separate directory?  Or do you `touch'
> >> the PNG files in advance to avoid execution of the rule in case
> >> there are file creation time issues during checking out a git
> >> repository?]
> >
> > I don't understand what you mean by touching the files in advance,
> > which isn't surprising since I've never tried to learn make or our
> > makefile process.
> 
> With `touching' file `foo.png' I mean to call
> 
>   touch foo.png
> 
> or something similar so that `foo.png' gets a recent timestamp.  This
> assures that `make' doesn't try to rebuild `foo.png' from `foo.svg'
> due to incorrect timestamps.

We don't do this for the other convert or gs rules in
Documentation/pictures/GNUmakefile.  Should we add such a `touch'
rule for all the conversions, or is there some reason why the svg
generation is different from the gs -dAutoRotatePages... rules?

> > When I do a "make doc-clean" in Documentation/pictures/, followed by
> > a "make doc", my version of imagemagick (6.3.7, from a standard
> > debian/stable install) creates png images.
> 
> Have you verified that the images are fine?

They look fine when I glance at the generated web page.

Cheers,
- Graham