Re: Why docs/term.h ???

[Hans-Bernhard B. <br...@ph...>]

On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Petr Mikulik wrote:

> In summary: it is obviously only gnuplot.gih which likes to be created
> with only those terminals compiled into the gnuplot executable, right?

No.  This should apply to *all* editions of the documentation integrated
with the program itself.  In a nutshell: if you type 'help pdf' in your
gnuplot, it should display the help chunk from term/pdf.trm if and only if
'set term pdf', typed at that same prompt, turns on the pdf terminal.  
E.g. only if the PDF terminal was actually built into the program.  Same
for all other terminal drivers.  The crucial distinction is between
documentation closely linked to an individual binary, and documentation
distributed independent of it.

> Then, the particular piece of Makefile, should use the original method of
> creating its own xxxterm.h, and delete it after creation. 

I don't think anything like that was ever the original method.  The
original method, IIRC, was to have no private term.h at all, but just use
src/term.h for that purpose, because that file contains the definitive
selection of drivers.

I experimented with this, replacing all occurences of "term.h" in
docs/Makefile.in with $(TERM_H), and setting that to ../src/term.h.  Both
the gih and the "check" target worked nicely.

-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (br...@ph...)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.