| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@joyeecheung what are the steps to verify this works? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@joyeecheung any chance this whole thing could be refactored out of the main Makefile? @MylesBorins, one possible option is to use a new test file written by @joyeecheung to validate the output of the doctool - make doc && node test/doctool/test-make-doc.js. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@MylesBorins My way is: # Or get any other nightly builds wget https://nodejs.org/dist/v9.2.0/node-v9.2.0.tar.gz tar zxvf node-v9.2.0.tar.gz cd node-v9.2.0 # Move this makefile to the source tarball cp ../node/Makefile . # Or if you have a global node, it can use that one as well ./configure && make -j8 # observe that this should not install or try to build anything make doc-only # or you can use make --trace doc-only or make -n doc-only to see a trace Also if you are on Mac, make sure you are testing it with GNU Make v4.x (the default one is 3.x, which does not really have a problem with the previous configuration) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@refack Sorry, I am not sure I am following, by "the whole thing" do you mean "make doc-only"? But I am pretty sure there are people actually reading its output e.g. people working on doc tools, writing docs, or just wanting to read the latest docs.. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I'm not saying remove it, I'm suggesting moving it to it's own Makefile (possibly tools/doc/Makefile) or to a script in tools/doc/package.json. Then the doc target could be something like cd tools/doc && make or cd tools/doc && npm run build AFAICT make's change tracking mechanism doesn't give us a huge benefit, while having these targets in the main Makefile adds to it's complexity... |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@refack I think we can refactor it out to another Makefile (still nice to avoid rebuilding unmodified docs), but probably in another PR. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
BTW both #16661 and its previous implementation could result in concurrent npm install, which apparently does not play well with master and npm with locks..also npm is giving a funky warning about not supporting node-v10.0.0-pre whenever installing something with the locally built node.. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
opting to not land this on v6.x. Please feel free to change the labels and open a backport |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Checklist
Affected core subsystem(s)
build
Fixes: #16650
This is the real fix for #16650 , which makes sure that GNU make v4.x won't build the docs if the source is extracted from the source tarball (i.e. doc/api contains built docs) (see the theory in #16650 (comment))
Also during the investigation of this issue I think I have a better idea about #17043, I'll open a separate PR with a more robust available-node and try to fix all the $(NODE) usage there, hopefully fixing the makefile regression. For this PR the current implementation is enough.
cc @nodejs/build