On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:38 AM Shashvat <shashvatjain2...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > Hi Gedare!! > >> Is there a ticket associated with this, or any feature request? Or >> just something you thought of doing? > > > I am sorry I should have mentioned the motive behind the option. > I was planning to work on ticket #3333 which works on a specific posix-users > manual afaik. I wanted waf to build only this particular manual so asked > Chris on discord if it is possible and he told me how it was broken, and that > it would be good to add an option that enables this. >> >> >> I don't think an extra blank line is needed here. > > > This was my fault. >> >> > >> > $ ./waf >> > >> > @@ -448,8 +450,10 @@ verbose level: >> > $ ./waf configure --sphinx-options "-V -V" >> > $ ./waf clean build >> > >> > -You can enter a manual's directory and run the same configure command and >> > build >> > -just that manual. >> > +If you wish to build only some specific manuals, >> > +use the '--build-manuals=<manual-name-1>,<manual-name-2>' option with >> > +configure to build only those specific manuals. >> > + >> > >> > Documentation Standard >> > ---------------------- >> > diff --git a/common/waf.py b/common/waf.py >> > index fa9aecb..e6ae059 100644 >> > --- a/common/waf.py >> > +++ b/common/waf.py >> > @@ -240,6 +240,11 @@ def cmd_configure(ctx): >> > check_sphinx_extension(ctx, 'sphinxcontrib.bibtex') >> > >> > # >> > + # Build specific manuals. >> This spacing looks wrong. >> >> > + # >> > + if ctx.options.build_manuals!="": >> Follow the coding style of the surrounding text. For Python code, we >> generally follow >> https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/python-devel.html > > > Thanks, I will take a look. >> >> >> > + ctx.env.MANUALS = ctx.options.build_manuals.split(',') >> Probably want a blank line here. None of the other options take >> multiple values. I wonder if there is any value to having a multiple >> option here, versus building just one manual selectively? You could >> still have an 'all' option as the default. That will reduce the >> complexity of the command line argument processing. > > >> >> I guess by default this will not build any manuals? The principle of >> least surprise suggests that by default the behavior should be what it >> used to be if you omit the argument, so build everything. otherwise, >> you break existing workflows and scripts. > > > This does has the action of building all manuals by default. >> >> >> This is not good python, no indent after 'if', so there's nothing in >> the conditional code block, you just always set building to >> ctx.env.MANUALS. >> >> > + print("Building the following manuals:-") >> > + for manual in building: >> > + print(manual) >> missing indent here too. But the print statements seem to be >> inconsistent with other printed output for this code. You generally >> want to keep that consistent. > > > This is my first time submitting a patch by mail and looks like I messed > something up up while copying the diff, should have checked by applying the > diff before submitting. Looks like the indents are missing :) > If you don't have git-send-email working, then use git-format-patch and just email the patch instead of trying to copy-paste into your emailer
> > Thanks > Shashvat _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
