apt-3.90 build error

[Richard Bos]

Op maandag 11 december 2006 07:39, schreef Panu Matilainen:
> > I tried to build apt-3.90 for suse, but I get the following build error:
> > --------------------------
> > make[1]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/apt/BUILD/apt-0.5.15lorg3.90/doc'
> > make[1]: *** No rule to make target `apt.8', needed by `all-am'.  Stop.
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/apt/BUILD/apt-0.5.15lorg3.90/doc'
> > make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> > error: Bad exit status from /tmp/rpm-tmp.79897 (%build)
> > ---------------------------
> >
> > The previous version (3.2) just build fine.  What might be wrong here,
> > does anyone have a clue, with only the small error msg above?
>
> Are you getting this error when building from the tarball unmodified? I'd
> be a bit surprised, as the doc make doesn't actually do anything now,

he, that worked ;)

> if you look at the list of changes in 3.90:
> * a big man page overhaul: docbook/sgml tools aren't needed for building
>    them and contents have been revised for apt-rpm (Vincent Danen, Ralf
>    Corsepius)

Yes, that is what I read on the apt-rpm website, hence I posted my previous 
email as I knew things changed in that area.

> > Would it possible to use the xml sources in apt-rpm as well instead of
> > the sgml sources?  If so, I don't need to have the build error solved ;)
>
> See above, after a lengthy discussion in May-June this year we ditched the
> sgml/xml stuff completely, the man pages are now written as man pages
> instead of converting them between formats.

Ah, that is a pity.  As I used to build them with xmlto.  The command I use(d) 
is "xmlto man <input file>".  It should have been peanuts for Ralf to have 
this included in the Makefila.am.  I say 'it's a pity', as it may occur in 
the future that apt-rpm is merged with the upstream apt (I read that in the 
email archives).  Hopefully this happens and than the xml formatted manpages 
are to be used again.  Never mind, I'm going to use what you provide :))

What is the status of the apt-3.90?  Is it still considered beta or can it be 
declared released, as it has been out in the field for 2 months or so?


-- 
Richard Bos
Without a home the journey is endless