From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-29 09:58:38
On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:32:44 +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote
> Jeff Garland wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Dec 2004 16:00:12 +0300, Vladimir Prus wrote
> >> On Wednesday 29 December 2004 13:04, Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> > the date_time, specifically the libs/date_time/xmldoc directory,
> >> > includes the catalog.xml file:
> > This is an internally used file, so it shouldn't cause errors - but
> > perhaps an
> > error has crept in? Are you seeing a problem when you try and generate
> > the
> > overall boost results?
> No, I see a problem when trying to build date_time docs.
Maybe you can be more explicit about what you are doing and the errors you are
seeing. BTW, we haven't been able to build docs for quite awhile now and our
requests for help have gone unanswered on the boost-doc list. We weren't sure
what magic was applied to do the 1.32 release.
> > I noted before that for the 1.32 pdf date-time was
> > excluded and no one explained why/how that happened since the html was
> > clearly generated :-(
> I recall it was some kind of fop -> pdf convert bug, but I'm not sure.
> >> And date_time_autodoc.boostbook/ and other *.boostbook files should
> >> not be in CVS, too.
> > Yes, well, since we haven't been sucessful in getting all of the doxygen
> > to boost-book bridge to work well for date-time we have to slightly modify
> > the
> > generated files for our purpose. So that's why those are there.
> You mean that each time after modifying headers, you have to
> manually tweak the generated files?
That's correct -- although I think we actually use a script to do it. Sorry
to say I've been hands-off of this for awhile so I don't know the details.
Hopefully Bart will post later and describe the details.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk