This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [doc] Avoid conflicts between gdb and cross-gdb.
- From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
- To: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Cc: dje at google dot com, vapier at gentoo dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, monaka at monami-software dot com
- Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 18:43:34 +0300
- Subject: Re: [doc] Avoid conflicts between gdb and cross-gdb.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAJBvFxOPfJU42a-5vk6Uz3UYktAPSwnNekRw19OnuV4jJY0pww at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140801150722 dot GJ14672 at adacore dot com> <3531941 dot zJjkhARRvn at vapier> <20140806132435 dot GC5204 at adacore dot com> <837g2lpmzz dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20140806173705 dot GA4881 at adacore dot com> <83zjfho6sv dot fsf at gnu dot org> <20140806195324 dot GC4881 at adacore dot com> <CADPb22Rjz-tsLrqhBo1DXNJ=pU8sR-E5am11cs2dwtnLxdubQg at mail dot gmail dot com> <20140806213412 dot GD4881 at adacore dot com>
- Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>
> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 14:34:12 -0700
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>,
> gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>,
> monaka@monami-software.com
>
> (1) Should we support out of the box distinct targets to be installed
> at the same prefix?
> (2) Should the name of some of those files match the name of
> the executable?
>
> For (1), I'm leaning towards a "not necessary", but we can perhaps
> find a middle ground. I don't know the various defaults to really
> help making a decision without spending some time to look at it.
> Either way, I have a fairly neutral opinion, so I am happy following
> the group.
>
> For (2), I thought that for the man page, and (to some degree, since
> I know little about info) the "info" page as well. But again,
> I don't really have much of opinion on that.
But "info FOO" does not mean "show me the file FOO", it means "show me
the manual whose DIR entry is FOO". (Although the stand-alone Info
reader falls back to the file interpretation if it doesn't find FOO in
the DIR menu.)
And the Info system doesn't really support more than one manual for
the same tool anyway.
So I think, unlike the man pages, the Info manual should not be
renamed.