Karl Berry wrote: > A few days ago, gnulib-tool --import (or --update) started reporting > > gnulib-tool: *** missing --doc-base option > gnulib-tool: *** Stop. > > The help msg says "doc" is supposed to be used as a default, but > apparently not. I looked briefly at the script and surmise that the > default is only effective if the cache file doesn't exist, or something > like that.
Yes. If the cache file already exists, from a time before we introduced the --doc-base option, I think it's better to punt and let the maintainer decide where he wants to have the gnulib doc. The maintainer was not presented the option to choose a --doc-base last time. Therefore he would likely be surprised/annoyed if gnulib-tool erased parts of his doc/ directory without asking for confirmation. > So I just ran gnulib-tool --doc-base doc to get it into gnulib-cache.m4, > which is fine Yup. > but it seems the behavior or the error message or the > documentation could be improved. Can you suggest a wording? Bruno
