[PATCH macros 2/2] doc: Specify minimum xmlto version to XORG_CHECK_XMLTO

[Gaetan Nadon]

On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 12:29 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:09 AM, Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 09:25 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 20:16 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> >>
> >> Adds an optional parameter to XORG_CHECK_XMLTO to enforce a minimum
> >> version needed like the asciidoc check.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Nicholson <dbn.lists at gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  xorg-macros.m4.in |   16 +++++++++++++++-
> >>  1 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/xorg-macros.m4.in b/xorg-macros.m4.in
> >> index e9eecf2..016f169 100644
> >> --- a/xorg-macros.m4.in
> >> +++ b/xorg-macros.m4.in
> >> @@ -304,7 +304,7 @@ AC_SUBST(MAKE_PDF)
> >>  AC_SUBST(MAKE_HTML)
> >>  ]) # XORG_CHECK_DOCBOOK
> >>
> >> -# XORG_WITH_XMLTO
> >> +# XORG_WITH_XMLTO([MIN-VERSION])
> >>  # ----------------
> >>  # Minimum version: 1.5.0
> >>  #
> >> @@ -352,6 +352,20 @@ elif test "x$use_xmlto" = x"no" ; then
> >>  else
> >>     AC_MSG_ERROR([--with-xmlto expects 'yes' or 'no'])
> >>  fi
> >> +m4_ifval([$1],
> >> +[if test "$have_xmlto" = yes; then
> >> +    # scrape the xmlto version
> >> +    AC_MSG_CHECKING([the xmlto version])
> >> +    xmlto_version=`$XMLTO --version 2>/dev/null | cut -d' ' -f3`
> >> +    AC_MSG_RESULT([$xmlto_version])
> >> +    AS_VERSION_COMPARE([$xmlto_version], [$1],
> >> +        [if test "x$use_xmlto" = xauto; then
> >> +            AC_MSG_WARN([xmlto version $xmlto_version found, but $1
> >> needed])
> >> +            have_xmlto=no
> >> +        else
> >> +            AC_MSG_ERROR([xmlto version $xmlto_version found, but $1
> >> needed])
> >> +        fi])
> >> +fi])
> >>  AM_CONDITIONAL([HAVE_XMLTO], [test "$have_xmlto" = yes])
> >>  ]) # XORG_CHECK_XMLTO
> >>
> >>
> >> Tested-by: Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca>
> >>
> >> If you were considering bumping the version number of the util-macros
> >> package and releasing it, I'll soon post a patch
> >> that will require a version bump as well.
> >
> > Well, I guess we have to bump it to use it in libXi. I don't know if
> > that's a minor or patch level bump. I guess minor since we're changing
> > the interface to the macros.
> >
> > That would be 1.7.0 then. The feature will work anyway if libXi is
> > configured against a version of util-macros containing the feature. The
> > benefit of bumping the number in both packages is to "enforce" that the
> > feature is used.
> 
> I think I'd rather just bump the patch level since there's not a new macro here.
> 

Ah, ok. I thought you wanted to bump XORG_MACROS_VERSION(1.5) to force
libXi to configure against the latest util-macros with your changes
because you wrote "we have to bump it to use it in libXi". 

I think bumping the patch level is good enough in this situation. If
someone configures latest libXi against util-macros @ 1.5, for example,
the parameter is ignored.





> --
> Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20100304/d3b91f08/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20100304/d3b91f08/attachment-0001.pgp>