[ITP] doxygen-1.8.0-2 -- A documentation system for C++, C, Java, Objective-C, IDL (Corba and Microsoft flavors) and to some extent PHP, C#, and D.

[David Stacey]

On 03/10/12 21:37, Warren Young wrote:
> On 10/2/2012 1:10 PM, David Stacey wrote:
>> On 02/10/12 02:27, Warren Young wrote:
>>> You should keep using -1 for subsequent build attempts
> >
>> Apologies for that. I was following the advice here:
>> http://cygwin.com/setup.html#submitting
>
> I was sure I'd seen Corinna complain about a -1 to -2 during a similar 
> discussion over a proposed package upload, but even if my recollection 
> is correct, I think the public document takes precedence.
>

Thanks to Warren and Christopher for the clarification. I'll revert to a 
-1 name - you all have to promise not to get confused :-)

>>> 2. /usr/share/doc/doxygen/latex should be removed,
>>
>> I agree completely, but I kept the 'latex' directory for a couple of
>> reasons. Firstly, this was consistent with the previous build of doxygen
>> (1.7.4-1), which included the latex directory [1].
>
> Yes, I realize you were just following my previous example, but I'm 
> far from infallible.  I saw something in your package I would have 
> removed from mine if I'd realized that at the time.

I had a private e-mail yesterday from someone requesting that the latex 
directory be retained. No reason was given. If Sergio would like to 
reply to the mailing list with his reasons then I will consider them. 
However, in the absence of a compelling argument, Warren has convinced 
me: the latex directory will go. I'll generate a PDF of the manual and 
include that as Warren suggested.

>>> There's a bogus test in Doxygen's configure script, where it goes
>>> looking for dot(1) from GraphViz.  It does a weak check for it in a
>>> few common locations, and yells if it isn't there.  dot(1) being a
>>> filter, there isn't a huge penalty for using the native Windows
>>> version, which of course doesn't get installed in any of those
>>> locations.  It would be nice to either 1) send upstream a test using
>>> the PATH instead of a hardcoded list; or 2) adopt Yaakov's GraphViz
>>> package:
>>
>> If the configure script doesn't detect dot(1) then it isn't the end of
>> the world - you can specify the location of the dot executable by
>> specifying DOT_PATH in the project configuration file:
>
> Are you sure Doxygen doesn't use dot during the package build process, 
> such as part of building Doxygen's own manual?  I don't see why it 
> would bother trying to find it at configure time otherwise.

There is a HAVE_DOT in the project configuration file, and I was hoping 
that doxygen might be clever and default this to YES or NO based on the 
test in the configure file - but I don't think it does! I've had a quick 
grep through the source code, and the only apparent use of this dot(1) 
check is that one of the examples gets skipped if dot(1) is missing.

I will try to have the next doxygen package ready for about this time 
tomorrow. Thank you for all your advice with this - hopefully we're 
nearly there now!

Dave.