Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Build the Memory Management Reference from the MPS tree #187

Draft
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

rptb1
Copy link
Member

@rptb1 rptb1 commented Mar 3, 2023

Changes to the MPS manual could break the Memory Management Reference. Incorporating the build will allow us to check it, both manually and as part of CI.

See #166 (comment) .

See also #165 though this branch is not intended to resolve that issue, only mitigate risks.

…date Memory Management Reference builds from there.

Copied from Perforce
 Change: 199111
@rptb1
Copy link
Member Author

rptb1 commented Mar 3, 2023

Here is a partial build of the Memory Management Reference using Read the Docs from this branch https://mmref.readthedocs.io/en/branch-2023-03-03-make-mmref/

This is achieved by setting the MMREF environment variable to 1 in the mmref Read the Docs configuration.

It's only a partial build because we post-process the Sphinx output to produce https://www.memorymanagement.org/ and Read the Docs is not running that script. It probably could.

@rptb1
Copy link
Member Author

rptb1 commented Mar 4, 2023

I am mystified by the errors from the Read the Docs builds. I have submitted readthedocs/readthedocs.org#10103 .

@thejayps thejayps added the optional Will cause failures / of benefit. Worth assigning resources. label Mar 20, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
build Problems with builds and build automation documentation optional Will cause failures / of benefit. Worth assigning resources.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants