[LTP] [PATCH v4 4/5] Makefile: Update 'doc' target, add 'doc-clean'

Petr Vorel pvorel@suse.cz
Wed Apr 9 15:22:24 CEST 2025


Hi Ricardo,

...
> >> Right, I tried out something (below) which kind of works but it would require
> >> the setup target becoming the default... The sad part is that even if
> >> the user chooses not to use a virtualenv, linuxdoc does not seem to be
> >> packaged in the major distros (I checked Tumbleweed, Debian and Fedora
> >> only Fedora has it)

> > I'm surprised that any distro package linuxdoc. And IMHO all linux distros
> > require pip install to run inside virtualenv.


> I was surprise it isn't :(

IMHO kernel developers do very little packaging. And the rest does not care
about (it's not mandatory for building a distro kernel, it's only for publishing
on https://docs.kernel.org/). I would guess quite a lot of kernel maintainers
use Fedora (and Debian) maybe the reason why it's there.

> >> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> >> index 506678934983..69a8016535a9 100644
> >> --- a/Makefile
> >> +++ b/Makefile
> >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ $(1):: | $$(abs_top_builddir)/$$(basename $$(subst -,.,$(1)))
> >>  endif
> >>  endef

> >> -COMMON_TARGETS         += testcases tools metadata
> >> +COMMON_TARGETS         += testcases tools metadata doc

> > I was testing doc part of COMMON_TARGETS as well (that requires that
> > generic_leaf_target.mk to be included). But that means that doc will be always
> > built, which means that user either has linuxdoc and others installed as a
> > package or via 'make -C doc setup'.


> +1

> >>  # Don't want to nuke the original files if we're installing in-build-tree.
> >>  ifneq ($(BUILD_TREE_STATE),$(BUILD_TREE_SRCDIR_INSTALL))
> >> @@ -169,8 +169,8 @@ INSTALL_TARGETS             += $(addprefix $(DESTDIR)/$(bindir)/,$(BINDIR_INSTALL_SCRIPTS))

> >>  $(INSTALL_TARGETS): $(INSTALL_DIR) $(DESTDIR)/$(bindir)

> >> -.PHONY: doc
> >> -doc: metadata-all
> >> +#.PHONY: doc
> >> +#doc: metadata-all

> > 'doc: metadata-all' is a part I suggested to be deleted (useless now).
> > But IMHO it should be replaced by other phony target - my plan was to use
> > generic_leaf_target.mk (reuse existing LTP build system instead writing from
> > scratch), but don't have doc/ part of build from top level Makefile (avoid
> > dealing with virtualenv). Therefore I guess at least doc target in this patchset
> > is more or less correct. Maybe having doc as a part of CLEAN_TARGETS
> > variable will work.

> Adding it to CLEAN_TARGETS will work, as it will create the `doc-clean`
> target.

+1. I hope it creates also doc-distclean (to remove doc/.venv).


> >>  .PHONY: check
> >>  check: $(CHECK_TARGETS)
> >> diff --git a/doc/Makefile b/doc/Makefile
> >> index 2062d6e93561..7f11e659cab8 100644
> >> --- a/doc/Makefile
> >> +++ b/doc/Makefile
> >> @@ -23,15 +23,17 @@ setup: $(VENV_DIR)
> >>  ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json:
> >>         $(MAKE) -C ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata

> >> -all: ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json
> >> +all: ${abs_top_builddir}/metadata/ltp.json setup
> >>         $(RUN_VENV); sphinx-build -b html . html

> > Using virtualenv by default was something which Andrea did not want (equivalent
> > of this was in my v1). And I agree we don't want packagers to deal with
> > virtualenv (FYI atm there are at least SUSE, Buildroot and Yocto packages; Red
> > hat plans to use it as well).


> Hm, but if we have a top-level target "doc" which setup the venv by
> default, it will be even more confusing... Maybe having both doc and
> doc-setup would make sense?

> With this, we can opt-in the venv by doing `make doc-setup` first. We
> can clean it with `make doc-clean` or the top-level `make clean` and
> `make distclean`

It is confusing, but it would be documented.

I wanted top level doc to be as easiest as possible. And generally have top
level targets as simple as possible (shortcuts - go to LTP git directory and
type short make target to have things done):

make -C doc # without venv

make doc # for venv
(shorter than make doc-setup; make doc)

But if you consider it too confusing, it's not that long the targets you
suggest. It'd be nice to have opinion from others.

Kind regards,
Petr


More information about the ltp mailing list