On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 12:43 +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> On Friday 2015-01-23 17:44, David Malcolm wrote:
> > The following patch builds and installs the JIT documentation for
> > the website (just HTML for now).
> > 
> > It's tricky to test (I don't have a copy of /www/gcc/bin/preprocess),
> > but I was able to use this to generate sane-looking documentation,
> > both for the .texi files, and for the JIT documentation.
> You can easily get the preprocess script by checking out wwwdocs,
> cf. https://gcc.gnu.org/about.html.

Thanks.

> That still will require MetaHTML which, sadly, became an abandoned
> FSF project, and will require a hack or two to build, so let's just
> go with your patch.
> 
> A few notes, though:
> 
> > maintainer-scripts/ChangeLog:
> > 	PR jit/64257
> > 	* update_web_docs_svn: Don't delete gcc/jit/docs,
> > 	since the jit docs are not .tex files (Makefile, .rst and
> > 	.png).	Special-case the building of the JIT docs (using
> > 	sphinx-build).  Special-case copying them up (since they
> > 	contain .css, .js and .png files in addition to .html, and
> > 	have nested subdirectories).
> 
> The "since" should be part of the code, not the ChangeLog.

Fair point; I've moved both of these to comments in the file.

> > diff --git a/maintainer-scripts/update_web_docs_svn b/maintainer-scripts/update_web_docs_svn
> > index c661220..c7eb890 100755
> > --- a/maintainer-scripts/update_web_docs_svn
> > +++ b/maintainer-scripts/update_web_docs_svn
> > +# The JIT is a special-case, using sphinx rather than texinfo.
> 
> special case

Fixed.

> > +# The jit Makefile uses "sphinx-build", which is packaged in
> > +# Fedora and EPEL 6 within "python-sphinx".
> 
> JIT (above) vs jit (here)?

I now use lowercase "jit" throughout.

> How about saying "...packaged in "python-sphinx" in Fedora and
> EPEL 6 and in "python-Sphinx" in openSUSE"?

Added.

> > +# Again, the jit is a special case, with nested subdirectories
> > +# below "jit", and with some non-HTML files (.png images from us,
> > +# plus .js and .css supplied by sphinx).
> > +for file in $(find jit \
> > +                -name "*.html" -o -name "*.css" \
> > +                -o -name "*.js" -o -name "*.png"); do
> 
> This looks like a Bash-ism.  Can you use backticks of something
> like 
> 
>   find ... | while read file; ...
> 
> ?

Done.

(Your proposal is superior since it avoids potentially long command
lines; but out of interest, why specifically avoid bash here?)

> > +    cp $file $DOCSDIR/$file
> 
> Just "cp $file $DOCSDIR/" ?  This one may be a better of style,
> but is easier to tweak in case we need to quote later on, for
> example.

The jit documentation has a nested directory structure (e.g. there are 7
instances of an "index.html" within them), "$file" actually will contain
a path to a file, so we do need to have $file on the right-hand side of
the cp command.

I've added a comment to clarify that.

I'm attaching a revised patch which I hope addresses these issues;
tested (crudely) as before.

How does this look?

Thanks
Dave