# Does Darkfish-Rdoc work properly?

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [March 3, 2009, 12:09am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841 "2009-03-03T00:09:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 12:09am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841/1 "2009-03-03T00:09:47Z")

</div>

Hi, I’ve installed “rdoc” via gem and got surprised since the downloades  
version in Darkfish-Rdoc:  
[dev(E)iate](http://deveiate.org/projects/Darkfish-Rdoc/)

I’m not sure if Darkfish-Rdoc is the continuation of RDoc or a  
fork/version (I  
expected it was a version due to the project description).

The version installed is rdoc 2.4.1.

When I run “rdoc” in a simple directory with just 3 files, I get a big  
ammount  
of doc directories (obviously something is wrong) like:

my\_project/doc/doc/doc/doc/doc/doc/doc…

containing files with name:

MyClass\_html\_html\_html\_html\_html\_html.html

and so on.

Could somebody clarify me on it?

Thanks a lot.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 12:56am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841/2 "2009-03-03T00:56:41Z")

</div>

On Mar 2, 2009, at 15:04, Iñaki Baz C. wrote:

> Hi, I’ve installed “rdoc” via gem and got surprised since the  
> downloades  
> version in Darkfish-Rdoc:  
> [dev(E)iate](http://deveiate.org/projects/Darkfish-Rdoc/)
> 
> I’m not sure if Darkfish-Rdoc is the continuation of RDoc or a fork/  
> version (I  
> expected it was a version due to the project description).

It is a generator.

> The version installed is rdoc 2.4.1.

This version contains the latest Darkfish as of today.

> and so on.
> 
> Could somebody clarify me on it?

Don’t run rdoc against it’s output directory.

If your project uses hoe, `rake docs` will do the right thing.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 1:02am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841/3 "2009-03-03T01:02:32Z")

</div>

El Martes, 3 de Marzo de 2009, Eric H.  
escribió:

> Don’t run rdoc against it’s output directory.

True, thanks. But I wonder why using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108 I can run  
“rdoc”  
command from the sources directory (so it generates “doc” directory).  
Anyway  
I understand that I shouldn’t do it.

Thanks a lot.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\
**Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 4:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/does-darkfish-rdoc-work-properly/161841/4 "2009-03-03T04:06:55Z")

</div>

On Mar 2, 2009, at 16:00 , Iñaki Baz C. wrote:

> El Martes, 3 de Marzo de 2009, Eric H. escribió:
> 
> > Don’t run rdoc against it’s output directory.
> 
> True, thanks. But I wonder why using RDoc V1.0.1 - 20041108 I can  
> run “rdoc”  
> command from the sources directory (so it generates “doc”  
> directory). Anyway  
> I understand that I shouldn’t do it.

most ppl generate rdoc via their rakefile and that includes a “clean”  
dependency that is met before the rdoc generates. If you use hoe you  
get this for free.