From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] SGML index build fix |
Date: | 2007-01-08 02:03:34 |
Message-ID: | 19552.1168221814@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Perhaps even more to the point, what makes you think that someone
>> will notice the warning? If the docs build is one step in an
>> automated build process, this seems unlikely.
> Taking a closer look, it's pretty much guaranteed that no one will see
> them, because the targets they are attached to are intermediate,
> normally followed by latex runs.
If we think this is a problem, ISTM the correct answer is to just force
a repeat jade run when doing "make all". The only objection to that
AFAICS is that when you're doing docs work and only need a draft to
look at, you'd rather it not run twice. But perhaps we could address
that by providing a separate target, "make draft" say, that runs jade
but once.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-08 02:28:58 | Re: Full page writes |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-01-08 01:59:54 | Re: proposal: catch warnings |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2007-01-08 02:50:43 | Re: [HACKERS] SGML index build fix |
Previous Message | L Bayuk | 2007-01-07 23:19:09 | Re: BCC55 and libpq 8.2 |