Opened 19 months ago

Closed 19 months ago

Last modified 15 months ago

#4607 closed defect (fixed)

Makefile does not generate a correct nochuncks book

Reported by: Pierre Labastie Owned by: lfs-book
Priority: normal Milestone: 10.0
Component: Book Version: SVN
Severity: normal Keywords:
Cc:

Description

Reported by K. Buckley on -dev:

the noChunks book doesn't
"see" any changes made by aux-file-data.sh and so ends up
rendering, for example, in Chapter 3's package listing

  LFS-Bootscripts (20191031) - BOOTSCRIPTS-SIZE KB:

rather than

  LFS-Bootscripts (20191031) - 32 KB:

The fix is very simple, remove the "2" of lfs-html2.xml in the instructions:

        $(Q)xsltproc --nonet                                \
                --stringparam rootid "$(ROOT_ID)"      \
                --output $(BASEDIR)/$(NOCHUNKS_OUTPUT) \
                stylesheets/lfs-nochunks.xsl           \
                $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-html2.xml

But Bruce said this would have some impact on the scripts for rendering the book, so this needs some clarification.

Change History (9)

comment:1 by Bruce Dubbs, 19 months ago

Let's see if we can understand this.

Both book: and nochunks have identical validate and profile-html perrequsites.

validate: outputs $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-html2.xml and $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-full.xml; it then runs aux-file-data.sh against $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-full.xml

profile-html: uses $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-full.xml and outputs $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-html.xml

book: uses $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-html.xml to render the html files.

nochunks: uses $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-html2.xml to render the html files


I committed revision 11773. See if that works. (s/html2/full/ in nochunks)

comment:2 by Pierre Labastie, 19 months ago

I was wondering why you used lfs-full instead of lfs-html, so I did a diff of the generated books with one and the other. The only changes are automatically generated ID refs, so not visible.

Now I wonder why we have the profile-html target at all, since it does not seem to change the output... Doing a diff of lfs-full.xml and lfs-html.xml, I see two main changes (there may be more, the output is big):

  • the sect1info nodes are removed
  • the character entities (such as &#A9;) are replaced by the characters themselves (© in the example)

So maybe it is useful for some encoding combinations, but if it is useful for chunked output, why not use it for non chunked?

Last edited 19 months ago by Pierre Labastie (previous) (diff)

comment:3 by Bruce Dubbs, 19 months ago

I used lfs-html.xml because that is what book: uses.

I really don't want to make any other changes. What we have works, even if it is not perfect.

in reply to:  3 comment:4 by Pierre Labastie, 19 months ago

Replying to bdubbs:

I used lfs-html.xml because that is what book: uses.

I really don't want to make any other changes. What we have works, even if it is not perfect.

I do not want to make other changes either, but you used lfs-full.xml, not lfs-html.xml. So I wondered why... lfs-html.xml was my first proposition, actually.

comment:5 by Bruce Dubbs, 19 months ago

Ow! My mistake. I did want to change to lfs-html.xml. Updated at revision 11774.

comment:6 by Pierre Labastie, 19 months ago

Wrong place (you modified the pdf: target). Let me fix it.

comment:7 by Pierre Labastie, 19 months ago

Resolution: fixed
Status: newclosed

Eventually fixed at r11775

comment:8 by Bruce Dubbs, 19 months ago

Thanks. It's an unusual day for me. Perhaps I ought to take the day off...

comment:9 by Bruce Dubbs, 15 months ago

Milestone: 9.210.0

Milestone renamed

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.