Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?

Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
>> * $(GENERATED_SGML) is removed by make clean, therefore also by
>> make distclean
>> Ergo, this type of failure is *guaranteed* when trying to build
>> from a distribution tarball. This needs to be rethought.
>
> I looked at this some more, and this time I noticed that the makefile
> has
>
> .SECONDARY: postgres.xml $(GENERATED_SGML) HTML.index
>
> which puts the lie to the above theory. Also, in some simple testing
> here I've not been able to reproduce the behavior of make wanting to
> rebuild the HTML doc files when working from the alpha4 tarball. So
> I'm feeling baffled again.

I have tested a few different ways on a fresh CentOS vm and have been
unable to reproduce the issue either (including make clean prior to
build, mv openjade and jade so they are not found by configure)

> I can think of a couple of possible theories at this point:
>
> * those reporting problems are using versions of gmake that have bugs in
> handling .SECONDARY files.

I added Deepak on whose machine I witnessed the problem to the cc list
so that he can tell us what OS it was in his case.

> * those reporting problems have re-autoconf'd. Since version.sgml
> is declared to depend on $(top_srcdir)/configure, this would result
> in a forced docs rebuild. It might help a bit to make it depend on
> configure.in instead; though I'm far from sure this explains the
> complaints.

I'm reasonably certain he did not do this before seeing the problem. I
think it was a simple untar, configure, make, make install...

Joe