This is the mail archive of the binutils@sourceware.org mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Move position of @contents


On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> At the moment, the printed versions of most manuals (all except
> libiberty) explicitly put the table of contents at the very end of
> the document, after the index and (where used) the page containing
> typesetting information.  This is at odds with most (although admittedly
> not all) manuals I've seen, and is also at odds with the gcc manual.

The reason this once used to make sense was when makefiles used a sequence 
tex; texindex; tex to generate printed manuals, and contents at the end 
would be more likely to get the page numbers right in some cases.  Since 
nowadays texi2dvi is used and it iterates as many times as needed for page 
numbers to stabilize, putting the contents in their natural position at 
the front is now the right thing to do; I fixed the GCC manuals in 2001.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]