[jdk17u-dev] RFR: 8306408: Fix the format of several tables in building.md

Mon Feb 19 16:35:58 UTC 2024

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:16:56 GMT, Zdenek Zambersky <zzambers at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> `building.md` changes look fine.
>> How was the HTML re-generated? I'm seeing some unrelated changes which I guess may be down to the tool version used?
>> ~~~~
>> +@@ -11,14 +11,14 @@
>> +       span.underline{text-decoration: underline;}
>> +       div.column{display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: 50%;}
>> +   </style>
>> +-  <link rel="stylesheet" href="../make/data/docs-resources/resources/jdk-default.css" />
>> ++  <link rel="stylesheet" href="../make/data/docs-resources/resources/jdk-default.css">
>> +   
>> +   <style type="text/css">pre, code, tt { color: #1d6ae5; }</style>
>> + </head>
>> + <body>
>> +-<header id="title-block-header">
>> ++<header>
>> + <h1 class="title">Building the JDK</h1>
>> + </header>
>> + <nav id="TOC">
>> ~~~~
>
> @gnu-andrew I have tried on few more systems, but pandoc from rhel-8 is closest to orignal generator I could get.
> - [output of newer pandoc on f38](https://github.com/zzambers/jdk17u-dev/commit/tables-fix-f38) (2.19.2-21.fc38) or even ubuntu-20.04 (2.5-3build2) were much more different
> - output of older pandoc on rhel-7 (1.12.3.1-2.el7) was also much more different
> 
> Unfortunately generated html does not include information about pandoc used. Rhel-8's pandoc (2.0.6-6.el8_6) seems pretty close.

Thanks for looking into this, @zzambers. Yes, this is the nightmare any time we have checked-in generated files. I'm mulling over backporting the change to remove the generated configure in the next cycle, as that keeps being altered with unrelated changes when people using a different autoconf.

I'm happy for this to go in as is. It would be nice to have known what was used to generate the original, but I imagine it was close to what you have on RHEL 8.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/pull/2205#issuecomment-1952839897