Re: Implementing notrans_man_MANS

[Peter Breitenlohner]

On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

> > > Also, the whole thing would probably be a lot more readable if the
> > > ?NOTR?/?DOTR? prefixes vanished and were replaced by full rules, wrapped
> > > in `if %?NOTRANS_MANS%'.  That would be a better name for NOTR, and
> > > since it would then only appear a couple of times, it could be longer
> > > without pain, too.
>
> > Do you mean something like:
> >         install-man: install-man1 install-notrans-man1
> >         install-man1: trans_DEPENDENCIES
> >                 trans_RULES
> >         install-notrans-man1: notrans_DEPENDENCIES
> >                 notrans_RULES
>
> No.

Hi Ralf,

what then? Maybe this:

if only trans
        install-man1: trans_DEPENDENCIES
                trans_RULES
as before, if only notrans
        install-man1: notrans_DEPENDENCIES
                notrans_RULES
or if both are present
        install-man1: trans_DEPENDENCIES notrans_DEPENDENCIES
                trans_RULES
                notrans_RULES

Pro: much simpler to read
Con: duplication of code, harder to maintain

or still something else. If so please indicate what.

Regards,
Peter