texi2html coming back soon in tetex ?
Sat Sep 3 12:32:00 GMT 2005
"James R. Phillips" wrote:
> Maybe so, but that misses the point. The point is, my putative package has to
> build from source by someone else, using only officially available cygwin
> packages. Thus, if it isn't available as a cygwin package, I have to put my
> own version in the octave source package. I guess I could, but it doesn't
> sound like the optimal solution.
Until about a month ago the Cygwin build process itself required
texi2html, even though it was not available in any current package, and
nobody objected. People building Cygwin have long been told to use
"make -k" so that doc building stuff doesn't cause the build to stop on
missing tools. For something that's tangential to the main
functionality of a package, I'd say it's not entirely critical that
every build tool be available in package form, especially if so noted in
More information about the Cygwin-apps