Re: what should be installed in the default case?

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:20:01PM +0000, Karl Berry wrote:
> Hi Patrice,
> 
>     texi2html may be installed under 3 names: texi2html, makeinfo and
>     texi2any. 
> 
> I can't remember if we discussed before, but are there options to
> determine the behavior as well?  We shouldn't use argv[0] *only*.  I
> poked around in the code for a couple minutes, but wasn't sure.

No there aren't. Maybe a --texi2html and a --gnu option for argument
parsing and default when processing html? What do you think? I am not
sure that --gnu is a good idea, it is just that an important differencce
is that option parsing is done in the gnu getopt way. Could also be
--makeinfo.

I don't think that something is needed to set the default format. A user 
wanting a different format should just use the corresponding --format 
option.

>     as texi2any, the default output is raw text and it accepts more 
>     options, 
> 
> I see makeinfo_options in texi2html.pl.  Where are the additional
> options for texi2{any,html} given?  Does the meaning of any option
> change, or is it just additions?  Sorry that my brain can't keep track
> of this from when we talked about it before.

@makeinfo_options is the list of options, they are really defined in 
the $T2H_OPTIONS hash. So the meaning doesn't change, the only 
difference is that only options in @makeinfo_options and @basic_options
are used when called as makeinfo, while all the texi2html options are
used when called as texi2any.

>     I think that texi2html should not be installed as long as 
>     it is distributed in a separate tarball. 
> 
> Really?  I would have thought there is no harm in installing texi2html
> too (by default), instead of making people download the separate
> texi2html package.

It will conflict with the separate package. So, I think that a special
make target is in order, that way distributions may package texi2html in 
texi2html or in texinfo. What I would like to avoid is to have texi2html
installed from both the texinfo and the texi2html tarball in the default
case.

For the default, being installed in texinfo and not in texi2html tarball 
would be rather counter-intuitive, since nothing would be installed in 
the default case from the texi2html tarball.

> Unless there is a conflict, I see no reason not to add the options to
> makeinfo.  In principle.

There is no real conflict. It was just to have a makeinfo that had the
same options that the C-makeinfo.

> Not "instead of"; "as well as".  We'll support both (and texi2html),
> going forward.

Ok. So I'll remove the difference between makeinfo and texi2any such
that the only difference is the default output format.

But for texi2html, I still think that it should not be installed with 
a make install, but something like make install-texi2html.

--
Pat