This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [patch] Share options between info and man page
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>
- Cc: brobecker at adacore dot com, mingjie dot xing at gmail dot com, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 17:58:57 +0300
- Subject: Re: [patch] Share options between info and man page
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CADNgcEwweARHgsH5ppJEY=Q8UrtKK7xi8mU6BN7EbjUs=ic1xg at mail dot gmail dot com> <8338fc1wed dot fsf at gnu dot org> <53983FFA dot 6020909 at redhat dot com> <CADNgcEwURN4xMTdMxqhb_poZ=mttgD5FmDNBeezumQgsagaUMw at mail dot gmail dot com> <53A82F8B dot 7080507 at redhat dot com> <CADNgcEz08cCEFTYUNN5gm7AxMGbmmZJMjy2pEYmHbVQO7vHePg at mail dot gmail dot com> <83wqc6qp2r dot fsf at gnu dot org> <CADNgcEwpYHJQSyBtYcwu+P_GuWsNXLhyQiC5b75bZm77ZogOnw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CADNgcEzJeWQh-rt57hVsyZnq7qVfR2dJCV9X5tu4jDyu=mNFyw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CADNgcExxHuj=aapNZAV7EGn7tyms8PnENwu8CS2NC_0nEpx=4A at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140707141843 dot GA6038 at adacore dot com> <83y4w5chra dot fsf at gnu dot org> <53BBBE39 dot 6040904 at redhat dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 10:47:37 +0100
> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
> CC: mingjie.xing@gmail.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
>
> > On top of that, this
> > whole "produce man pages from Texinfo" business was sold to us on the
> > assumption that "it makes maintenance simpler" (see
> > https://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2013-02/msg00290.html and the
> > discussions around it). To me this means that we put a bunch of
> > telltale markers into the Texinfo files, add a few Makefile rules, and
> > promptly forget everything we knew about that.
> >
> > But now it sounds like this arrangement is not simple at all, that we
> > need non-trivial changes to follow (which will probably stump someone
> > at some point, and perhaps even be changed and break the man-page
> > generation), we need to maintain texi2pod.pl, and whatnot else.
>
> I found some documention on texi2pod.pl here:
>
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Man-Page-Generation.html
>
> Sounds like we actually want '@table @gcctabopt'.
>
> > So I'm beginning to doubt that this is for the better.
>
> I think the benefits once this is in place outweigh the hurdle we're
> going through. I'd rather have a synced man page with the occasional
> odd formatting (that gets fixed eventually) than having to keep
> the two texts in sync manually.
In that case, if everyone else is happy with the patch, please approve
it, and let's see what happens next.