[libvirt] [PATCH] build: fix building error when building without libvirtd

[Wen Congyang]

At 03/09/2011 10:53 AM, Eric Blake Write:
> On 03/08/2011 07:15 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
>> When building libvirt without libvirtd, I receive the following errors:
>>
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/wency/source/test/libvirt/src'
>>  (cd daemon && make  top_distdir=../libvirt-0.8.8 distdir=../libvirt-0.8.8/daemon \
>>      am__remove_distdir=: am__skip_length_check=: am__skip_mode_fix=: distdir)
>> make[1]: Entering directory `/home/wency/source/test/libvirt/daemon'
>> make[1]: *** No rule to make target `libvirtd.8.in', needed by `distdir'.  Stop.
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/wency/source/test/libvirt/daemon'
>> make: *** [distdir] Error 1
>>
>> This bug was caused by commit 6db98a2d.
>>
>> @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@ EXTRA_DIST =						\
>>  	test_libvirtd.aug                               \
>>  	THREADING.txt					\
>>  	libvirtd.pod.in					\
>> -	libvirtd.8.in					\
>>  	libvirtd.stp					\
>>  	$(AVAHI_SOURCES)				\
>>  	$(DAEMON_SOURCES)
>> @@ -47,6 +46,8 @@ BUILT_SOURCES =
>>  
>>  if WITH_LIBVIRTD
>>  
>> +EXTRA_DIST += libvirtd.8.in
> 
> NACK.  libvirtd.8.in _must_ be part of the tarball, even when you are
> not building libvirtd, since someone else using your tarball may decide
> to build libvirtd.  Rather, we need to move the rule for building
> libvirtd.8.in outside of the WITH_LIBVIRTD conditional, and always run it.

Yes, we should provide libvird.8.in in tarball.

> 
> Instead, does this fix your problem?
No, the building is still broken. We should move POD2MAN outside of the
WITH_LIBVIRTD conditional too.

>From 7cffdd4ce7c2aec15254bd0c701d0a819333bc00 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Wen Congyang <wency at cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 11:16:26 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] build: fix building error when building without libvirtd

Signed-off-by: Wen Congyang <wency at cn.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake at redhat.com>

---
 daemon/Makefile.am |   13 +++++++------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/daemon/Makefile.am b/daemon/Makefile.am
index 912440c..15e8129 100644
--- a/daemon/Makefile.am
+++ b/daemon/Makefile.am
@@ -60,9 +60,6 @@ augeas_DATA = libvirtd.aug
 augeastestsdir = $(datadir)/augeas/lenses/tests
 augeastests_DATA = test_libvirtd.aug
 
-POD2MAN = pod2man -c "Virtualization Support" \
-			-r "$(PACKAGE)-$(VERSION)" -s 8
-
 libvirtd.8: $(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in
 	sed \
 	    -e 's![@]sysconfdir[@]!$(sysconfdir)!g' \
@@ -71,9 +68,6 @@ libvirtd.8: $(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in
 	    < $< > $@-t
 	mv $@-t $@
 
-$(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in: libvirtd.pod.in
-	$(AM_V_GEN)$(POD2MAN) $< $@
-
 libvirtd_SOURCES = $(DAEMON_SOURCES)
 
 #-D_XOPEN_SOURCE=600 -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED=1 -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L
@@ -330,6 +324,13 @@ install-data-local: install-data-sasl
 uninstall-local:: uninstall-data-sasl
 endif # WITH_LIBVIRTD
 
+# This is needed for 'make dist' too, so can't wrap in WITH_LIBVIRTD.
+POD2MAN = pod2man -c "Virtualization Support" \
+			-r "$(PACKAGE)-$(VERSION)" -s 8
+
+$(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in: libvirtd.pod.in
+	$(AM_V_GEN)$(POD2MAN) $< $@
+
 # This is needed for clients too, so can't wrap in
 # the WITH_LIBVIRTD conditional
 if HAVE_SASL
-- 
1.7.1


> 
> diff --git i/daemon/Makefile.am w/daemon/Makefile.am
> index 912440c..520bdce 100644
> --- i/daemon/Makefile.am
> +++ w/daemon/Makefile.am
> @@ -71,9 +71,6 @@ libvirtd.8: $(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in
>  	    < $< > $@-t
>  	mv $@-t $@
> 
> -$(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in: libvirtd.pod.in
> -	$(AM_V_GEN)$(POD2MAN) $< $@
> -
>  libvirtd_SOURCES = $(DAEMON_SOURCES)
> 
>  #-D_XOPEN_SOURCE=600 -D_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED=1 -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506L
> @@ -330,6 +327,10 @@ install-data-local: install-data-sasl
>  uninstall-local:: uninstall-data-sasl
>  endif # WITH_LIBVIRTD
> 
> +# This is needed for 'make dist' too, so can't wrap in WITH_LIBVIRTD.
> +$(srcdir)/libvirtd.8.in: libvirtd.pod.in
> +	$(AM_V_GEN)$(POD2MAN) $< $@
> +
>  # This is needed for clients too, so can't wrap in
>  # the WITH_LIBVIRTD conditional
>  if HAVE_SASL
> 
> I'm just barely starting a test with that, and will probably push it
> under the build-breaker rule if it passes.
>