Re: Cannot make doc

[John Mandereau]

Le mercredi 09 décembre 2009 à 20:19 +0100, Francisco Vila a écrit :
> Thank you, now I have upgraded texi2html to v1.82 and have been able
> to complete the process.

Ah, if you used a version older than 1.82, it probably doesn't normalize
the node names the same way.


>   I uncompressed it from the deb package[1]
> because I can no longer compile it:
> 
> make[2]: Entering directory `/home/fravd/source/texi2html/po_messages'
> /usr/bin/xgettext --default-domain=texi2html --directory=.. \
>         --add-comments=TRANSLATORS: --language=Perl -k__ -k\/usr/bin/make_
> -k%__ -k__x -k__n:1,2 -k__nx:1,2 -k__xn:1,2 -kN__ \
>         --files-from=./POTFILES.in \
>         --copyright-holder='Free Software Foundation, Inc.' \
>         --msgid-bugs-address=''
> /usr/bin/xgettext: warning: The option --msgid-bugs-address was not specified.
>                             If you are using a `Makevars' file, please specify
>                             the MSGID_BUGS_ADDRESS variable there;
> otherwise please
>                             specify an --msgid-bugs-address command line 
> option.
> ../texi2html.pl:5963: invalid variable interpolation at "@"
> make[2]: *** [texi2html.pot-update] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/fravd/source/texi2html/po_messages'
> make[1]: *** [texi2html.pot] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/fravd/source/texi2html/po_messages'
> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1

Please report this directly to address@hidden including your
system configuration.


> [1]http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/all/texi2html/download
> The dirty hack was to uncompress the data/ directory from the .deb package 
> with
> 
>   $ sudo tar -xvzf data.tar.gz -C /
> 
> Installing the package the standard way does not work, either; I need
> to upgrade dpkg and libc6 as well.

Would rebuilding a .deb from the source package (.src.deb or whatever it
is named) help, and sending it to Ubuntu texi2html package maintainer
help?  If you don't know how to build a .deb package, please request
him/her directly.


>  I think this is too much for a
> single-file perl script.

I understand your feeeling, but a bug compilation or packaging bug is
still a bug to be reported to the people responsible for handling it.

Best,
John

signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée