Re: Why docs/term.h ???

[Lars H. <lhe...@us...>]

> But Lars introduced a change (revision 1.44 of docs/Makefile.in) that
> relies on a separate file, docs/term.h, built by concatenating and
> preprocessing the config.h file and a selection of terminal driver
> sources listed in docs/Makefile.in, $(CORETERM):
> 
> term.h: $(CORETERM)
>         @echo "Building term.h"
>         @cat ../config.h $(CORETERM) > term.c
>         $(CPP) $(DEFS) $(DEFAULT_INCLUDES) $(INCLUDES) $(CPPFLAGS)  \
>             -DTERM_DRIVER_H -DTERM_HELP term.c | \
>           sed '/^ *$$/d;/^#/d' >$@
>         @rm -f term.c
> 
> The problem with this construction is that the logical connection between
> config.h and the decision which terminal drivers to include exists *only*
> inside src/term.h, so this method completely fails to screen out the
> unwanted drivers.
> 
> So: why can't the doc2*.o files just refer to ../src/term.h?  What is
> docs/term.h needed for?  I guess this question goes mainly to Lars, but
> any insight from others would be valuable.
 
 Had to go back to the list archive ...

 There was a discussion here, Subject: "LaTeX docs, and docs cleanup",
 involving Petr, Ethan, and myself wrt alphabetical order of help
 entries. That was solved for allterm.h, where it matters.

 I think the idea behind intorducing docs/term.h was to simplify the
 makefile somewhat, but the problem is indeed that config.h alone does
 not mask out unwanted drivers, which was the assumption.