Re: [Boost-docs] Can't build bjam docs

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Can't build bjam docs
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-19 09:37:57

Rene Rivera wrote:
> Rene Rivera wrote:
>> Rene Rivera wrote:
>>> PS. But now it seems changes to the boostbook XSL has made my jam
>>> doc build generate invalid navigation image links,
>>
>> And this is the closest change likely responsible for that problem
>> <http://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/37989>
>
> Well I can't work around it by specifying the dirs manually:
>
>         <xsl:param>"admon.graphics.path=images/"
>         <xsl:param>"navig.graphics.path=images/"
>
> As the trailing slash is removed.

That's a bbv2 issue I've complained about before, so far the only response 
I've had is that the Docbook stylesheets are "stupid" to require the 
trailing slash :-(

> And I failed to understand the
> navbar XSL to any degree. So I can't fix that part.
>
> John, you made the change. Can you look at it? Can anyone look at it?

OK, here's the problem:

The stylesheets default to looking for the images in 
$boost_root/doc/html/images, with $boost_root defaulting to "..".

So if you follow the usual convention of putting your docs in a directory 
named "doc" then everything works as before and the generated html looks for 
the images in a location where they aren't usually present: unless you write 
clever Jamfiles to install them as you have :-)

Alternatively you can set the xsl param "boost.root" to point to the real 
root directory of the Boost tree and the images and stylesheets under 
boost-root/doc/ will be found: so if there's an update to the central 
stylesheets or images everything gets updated, plus we avoid all those 
needless copies :-)

Unfortunately you have <xsl:param>boost.root=. in your Jamfile, so the path 
where the images are expected isn't anything sensible.  Is there a 
particular reason for seting that param to that value?  Can you either 
remove it or better still set it to <xsl:param>boost.root=../../../.. and 
then everything should work as intended.

Joel: the white on white navigation text appears to be you're work: the 
navigation text is classed as "spirit-nav" and the stylesheet has:

    .spirit-nav a
    {
        color: white;
        padding-left: 0.5em;
    }

Is there any particular reason for this?

HTH, John.