Subject: Re: So...about this uuchk.1 problem...
To: Wiz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Nigel Reed <email@example.com>
Date: 11/09/2001 17:45:01
This should at least be documented in the UPDATING document shouldn't it?
I've been trying to get this solved for almost a week now all for the sake
of changing a YES to a NO.
Anyhow, I thought the whole idea of the new toolchains was to do away
with the UPDATING thing.
On Sat, Nov 10, 2001 at 12:35:48AM +0100, Wiz wrote:
> In article <20011109164647.C3447@nelgin.nu> you wrote:
> > MKMAN=YES
> This is not a variable that should be set to yes, the way MKMAN is
> currently used in the Makefiles.
> Just don't set it, since it defaults to building man pages. If you
> manually set it, it overrides the MKMAN=no for e.g. uuchk, which
> causes your build failure.
> I think the proper way to fix this would be replacing the MKMAN=no
> with NOMAN= #defined in the Makefiles, so that the user can set set
> MKMAN to yes or no to his liking (and I think Luke agrees, last we
> talked about that). This would need a fun search-and-replace in all
> the Makefiles in the tree that use MKMAN=no, of course.
> Thomas Klausner - firstname.lastname@example.org
> Slang is a language that rolls up its sleeves, spits on its hands, and
> goes to work. -- Carl Sandburg, poet and biographer (1878-1967)