https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=119510
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
If it is just about documentation, it might be easier not to enable those extra
languages during the build and just build their documentation.
Something in the make regenerate-opt-urls style, where even when D and Fortran
aren't enabled, we still build their documentation because of
OPT_URLS_HTML_DEPS = $(build_htmldir)/gcc/Option-Index.html \
$(build_htmldir)/gdc/Option-Index.html \
$(build_htmldir)/gfortran/Option-Index.html
$(OPT_URLS_HTML_DEPS): %/Option-Index.html: %/index.html
regenerate-opt-urls: $(srcdir)/regenerate-opt-urls.py $(OPT_URLS_HTML_DEPS)
$(srcdir)/regenerate-opt-urls.py $(build_htmldir) $(shell dirname
$(srcdir))
So, if we should do say
make go.srcinfo go.srcextra
even when go isn't enabled and ditto for other languages, it can be done.
Especially for languages which somebody might not have prerequisities for
around.
Primarily ada and d.
Though, even for cobol given that it is enabled only on very few architectures,
it might be better to replace the earlier committed patch with explicit make
invocations.
For cobol that would be
make cobol.srcextra cobol.srcman
(though cobol.srcman needs to be actually implemented, currently it does
nothing).
