Re: [Texi2html] merge of texi2html in texinfo

[Patrice Dumas]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 02:27:35PM -0500, Karl Berry wrote:
> Regarding the diffs:
>     +chmod a+x texi2html/mdate-sh
> 
> This does not seem like it should be necessary to me.  We don't chmod

I did it because configure complained, since mdate-sh is used during
configure:
PACKAGE_DATE=`"$srcdir"/texi2html/mdate-sh "$srcdir"/configure.ac`

> anything else.  Alternatively, we could execute it with ${CONFIG_SHELL}.

Why not. I agree that this could be considered as cleaner.

>     +AC_PATH_PROG([PERL], [perl], [/usr/bin/env perl], 
> [/opt/perl5/bin:"$PATH"])
> 
> This has nothing to do with the merge, I suppose, but as I've written
> before, I think it would be better to unconditionally use #!/usr/bin/env perl.
> Do we really depend on any perl-version-specific features?

I can't see why 
/usr/bin/env perl 
would be better than the path of the executable.

>     +            install-info info makeinfo po util doc texi2html
> 
> Well, texi2html should be built before doc, and (eventually)
> makeinfo shouldn't be built at all :).

Indeed, you're right.

> Just to be sure: do your tests include those few tests that are in
> makeinfo/tests?

Normally all should be integrated in the test suite. Maybe with some 
minor changes (for example it could be that html conditionals are tested
in the default case) but should be ok.

--
Pat