Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

Rafael Fontenelle
Federico,

Em sáb, 18 de ago de 2018 às 12:44, Federico Bruni
<[hidden email]> escreveu:
>
> Rafael, have you solved this already?
>
> You may try running manually this target from the source root (even if
> it should have been run already):
>
> make python-modules
>

Sorry for the delay, I had to replace my badblocked hard disk && set
up my system.

Sort of solved. I works if I run 'make' before 'make doc', as
mentioned by Walter and Jean-Charles.  But I hope there is another way
for me to build docs without building the whole software, as it is
very time- and resource-consuming -- I would rather not to lose
another HD... :)

'make python-modules' && 'make doc' doesn't seem to fix the issue of
not being able to find lilylib.

Also, very nice and clean flow:
$ make distclean
$ lysetup.sh    # my script running ./autogen.sh with some sed fixes
$ make
$ make doc

I attached this 'lysetup.sh' script, in case it helps any other
readers from Arch.

Again, thanks everyone for the hints!

Best regards,
Rafael Fontenelle

lysetup.sh (1K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

Rafael Fontenelle
In reply to this post by Jean-Charles MALAHIEUDE
Hi Jean-Charles

Em sex, 17 de ago de 2018 às 13:49, Jean-Charles Malahieude
<[hidden email]> escreveu:
>
> BTW, I've just committed changes to create-weblinks-itexi.py in order to
> get rid of all those "create-weblinks-itexi: warning: [pt]: translation
> missing for: BLAH". I let Rafael check the strings' copy&past…
>

I'll work on it soon. Thanks for the heads up!

Rafael Fontenelle


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

David Kastrup
In reply to this post by Rafael Fontenelle
Rafael Fontenelle <[hidden email]> writes:

> Federico,
>
> Em sáb, 18 de ago de 2018 às 12:44, Federico Bruni
> <[hidden email]> escreveu:
>>
>> Rafael, have you solved this already?
>>
>> You may try running manually this target from the source root (even if
>> it should have been run already):
>>
>> make python-modules
>>
>
> Sorry for the delay, I had to replace my badblocked hard disk && set
> up my system.
>
> Sort of solved. I works if I run 'make' before 'make doc', as
> mentioned by Walter and Jean-Charles.  But I hope there is another way
> for me to build docs without building the whole software, as it is
> very time- and resource-consuming -- I would rather not to lose
> another HD... :)

In my experience, the computing time for "make" is peanuts compared to
the computing time for "make doc".

--
David Kastrup


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

Jean-Charles MALAHIEUDE
Le 20/08/2018 à 18:31, David Kastrup a écrit :

> Rafael Fontenelle <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> Sort of solved. I works if I run 'make' before 'make doc', as
>> mentioned by Walter and Jean-Charles.  But I hope there is another way
>> for me to build docs without building the whole software, as it is
>> very time- and resource-consuming -- I would rather not to lose
>> another HD... :)
>
> In my experience, the computing time for "make" is peanuts compared to
> the computing time for "make doc".
>

I even will add that you'll never get a color picture when you use a
black and white negative. So to say: any change or new feature in LP's
sources might result in a snippet that won't compile well with an out of
dated binary.

If you have a multi-core CPU, add a file "local.make" in the top of your
build-dir containing a line:

CPU_COUNT = 4 #This is a quad-core


and run your build with one more job than the number of cores:

make -j5


Cheers,
--
Jean-Charles



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting Brazilian Portuguese translation for Docs

Rafael Fontenelle
Em seg, 20 de ago de 2018 às 13:31, David Kastrup <[hidden email]> escreveu:
>
> In my experience, the computing time for "make" is peanuts compared to
> the computing time for "make doc".
>

My intention to avoid the sum of 'make' + 'make doc' processing time,
but, you are right, 'make doc' takes much more than 'make'.

Em seg, 27 de ago de 2018 às 11:11, Jean-Charles Malahieude
<[hidden email]> escreveu:

>
> If you have a multi-core CPU, add a file "local.make" in the top of your
> build-dir containing a line:
>
> CPU_COUNT = 4 #This is a quad-core
>
> and run your build with one more job than the number of cores:
>
> make -j5
>

That was tremendously useful, as I indeed have a quad-core CPU.
Without these tweaks, 'make' took 11 minutes and 'make doc' took 62
minutes. With them, 'make' dropped to 5 minutes and 'make doc' dropped
to 33 minutes.

Cheers,
Rafael Fontenelle


12