Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread jean-frederic clere
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote: > > jean-frederic clere at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > I am sorry... I should have complained before in APR... Now it is a bit too > > late. > > > > We really should use a common tool in ASF when possible, if the tool is > > DOXYGEN > > we will have to use DOXYGEN.

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
jean-frederic clere at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I am sorry... I should have complained before in APR... Now it is a bit too > late. > > We really should use a common tool in ASF when possible, if the tool is > DOXYGEN > we will have to use DOXYGEN. Seeing it a little bit in deep, DOXYGEN is

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread jean-frederic clere
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote: > > Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> - Why using a different documentation tool in each ASF project? > > > > Yes, so WHY USING SCANDOC... If you're following APR, you have noticed that > > they moved from SCANDOC to DOXYGEN... > > BTW, reference..

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>My Unix admin life is a hell since I installed RedHat 7.1 in >Ireland and >it's so freakin' complicated everytime I have to >build/add/remove stuff that If you remember when you were looking for a Redhat distro when in England some weeks ago, I recommand you not to grab the RH 7.1 but stay wit

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> (No RPMs under any of my systems, thank god :) > > Take a look at rpm before calling god. I did, and I don't like it, at all. > A real plus for production environnement when many systems > are to be configured. > > My Unix admin life is easier sin

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>> I monitor apr-dev and the only 3 references are Ben Lauries >> post/reply from this week-end.. > >Authoritative enough... Anyway, goddamit, I didn't want to >start a fucking fight... As always , you peeps are overreacting... ...Peace... No need to fight here, just wait if the CURRENT jtc dev

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Yes, so WHY USING SCANDOC... If you're following APR, you have >> noticed that >> they moved from SCANDOC to DOXYGEN... > > When did they change ? > > I monitor apr-dev and the only 3 references are Ben Lauries > post/reply from this week-end.. Author

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>Yes, so WHY USING SCANDOC... If you're following APR, you have >noticed that >they moved from SCANDOC to DOXYGEN... When did they change ? I monitor apr-dev and the only 3 references are Ben Lauries post/reply from this week-end.. Don't forget that building a DOXYGEN will not so easy on many

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
Pier P. Fumagalli at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> - Why using a different documentation tool in each ASF project? > > Yes, so WHY USING SCANDOC... If you're following APR, you have noticed that > they moved from SCANDOC to DOXYGEN... BTW, reference Pier Ben Laurie at [EMAIL PROTECTED

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>I built it "by hand" and it works... What configure line did you use ? a minimal one, without QT or LATEX I guess >(No RPMs under any of my systems, thank god :) Take a look at rpm before calling god. A real plus for production environnement when many systems are to be configured. My Unix

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
jean-frederic clere at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Changing to DOXYGEN sounds bad for me because: > - It is written C it have to will to port to the platfroms we want to support. > (And that work does not looks easy). Agreed on this one.. > - Why changing a tool that works fine? Because it

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread Pier P. Fumagalli
I built it "by hand" and it works... (No RPMs under any of my systems, thank god :) Pier GOMEZ Henri at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I just started to look at doxygen. > > A nice tool but may require many > extras stuff (qt-2.1.0), tetex 1.0... > > The current RPM build of doxygen failed

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>Well I am not willing to change somethings that works! >APR is using SCANDOC. SCANDOC uses PERL and does not mean >extra porting work for >me. Even on my Linux Redhat box, it's not an easy task to install doxygen. The RPM found around are against libstdc++ 2.96 and qt-devel 2.1 (+/- Redhat 7

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread jean-frederic clere
GOMEZ Henri wrote: > > I just started to look at doxygen. > > A nice tool but may require many > extras stuff (qt-2.1.0), tetex 1.0... > > The current RPM build of doxygen failed about > missing command moc (a qt devel tool). > > Did you succeed build doxygen under MacOs X ? > > We'll have to

RE: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-11 Thread GOMEZ Henri
I just started to look at doxygen. A nice tool but may require many extras stuff (qt-2.1.0), tetex 1.0... The current RPM build of doxygen failed about missing command moc (a qt devel tool). Did you succeed build doxygen under MacOs X ? We'll have to see if all commiters (I think here at Mike

Re: [JTC] Use of DOXYGEN instead of SCANDOC...

2001-06-09 Thread kevin seguin
fine with me :) "Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote: > > What do you think about DOXYGEN ? > I'm thinking about changing from SCANDOC to DOXYGEN for the automatically > generated documentation from C code... > > Pier