Follow-up Comment #8, bug #68060 (group groff): At 2026-02-20T10:49:16-0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > Follow-up Comment #7, bug #68060 (group groff): >> Note that the new HAVE_URW_FONTS_OR_HAVE_GHOSTSCRIPT are using shell >> variables which Branden has already used for setting AM_CONDITIONALs. > > ...and I inherited that practice in turn from Bertrand. :) > >> There may be a "better" way of doing this but please test that the >> situation where urw-fonts are found but ghostscript is not results >> in all 35 plus U-35 are installed. I know that this patch works. > > Will do. I prefer to have Automake conditional variables, like the > shell variables populated by Autoconf/M4 macros, assert facts about > the build host's configuration, potentially including parameters > tunable by user-specified options to the "configure" script, rather > than computed conclusions/decisions we make as "policy", if you will, > in arranging the groff build. (The latter might be unavoidable > sometimes, though.) > > `HAVE_URW_FONTS_OR_HAVE_GHOSTSCRIPT` might be of daunting length, but > it's clear in its meaning, and that's a major virtue. I think it's a > winner if Automake doesn't support logical Boolean expressions as > predicates to its "if" conditionals. I'll have to consult its manual.
That much was easily resolved. No general Boolean expressions in Automake conditionals. You can name one conditional variable with optional negation. That's it. https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Usage-of-Conditionals.html I'll review your proposed patch some more but I expect it's fine as-is. Will commit with you as `--author` if I can't break it. Might need to review and update the relevant language in gropdf(1). And then resume my RC4 roll. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68060> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
