[Scons-dev] SCons doesn't bootstrap without libxml2

[anatoly techtonik]

On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Dirk Bächle <tshortik at gmx.de> wrote:

> On 18.02.2014 12:12, anatoly techtonik wrote:

>>

>> [...]

>>

>> There is a mistake. The bootstrap process never require documentation

>> tools

>> to be present.

>

>

> Correct, the bootstrap process doesn't require doc tools...but the

> SConstruct at the top-level does.


Right. SConstruct now requires doc tools, which wasn't the case for 2.3.0,
was it?


> So unless you call bootstrap.py from the

> top-level source dir everything should be fine, do you agree?


No. =) The previous behavior allowed me to run bootstrap, which together
with SConstruct is a quick integration test that SCons works ok. It is not
a replacement for runtest.py, but really saves a lot of time.


>>> hg up 2.3.0

>>> bootstrap.py

>>

>> C:\Python27\python.exe R:\scons\bootstrap\src\script\scons.py

>> scons: Reading SConscript files ...

>> doc: jw not found, skipping building User Guide.

>> doc: WARNING: no groff, skipping text and PostScript versions of man pages

>> ...

>>

>> The bootstrap.py "is a minimal build of SCons to bootstrap the full build

>> of all

>> the packages, as specified in our local SConstruct file."

>

>

> Doesn't the "full build of all the packages,..." include the full

> documentation?


Just update to 2.3.0 and check. I believe that the answer is no.

Also, because role of bootstrap.py script is to bootstrap the build. Having
to fetch dependencies manually diminishes its purpose.

In any case - make it optional - is a good principle. I need documentation
in my browser, and Google is a better helper that files on disk, so I really
want to leave documentation toolchain optional as it was before.


> If yes, then it requires one of the libxml2/lxml bindings

> installed...and I don't see a problem with that.

> If not, what command do I have to call (assuming the role of a release

> manager) to get a full release build, creating all packages such that

> they're ready for shipping with the guarantee that no files are missing?


You need to ensure that there are no warnings during the build process
and the warning about missing documentation build is among those that
you especially should not ignore as a release manager. ;)