Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pedro Alves <pedro@codesourcery.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, Ulrich Weigand <uweigand@de.ibm.com>,
	eliz@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [patch] New test+use texinfo @click - @HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK@ [Re: doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames)]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201110101651.00816.pedro@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111010153049.GA11463@host1.jankratochvil.net>

On Monday 10 October 2011 16:30:49, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:15:38 +0200, Pedro Alves wrote:
> > Leaving a piece of the manual out like that is not okay.
> 
> I was thinking about it but I do not find this part as too significant there,
> it is just another illustration.

A bad precedent.  Let's not do it please.  People e.g., 
building gdb's on old systems in order to make sure the binaries
are binary compatible with a wide range of OS versions will get 
silently bitten with parts of the manual missing.  If it's not
significant, drop it.  If it is, make it available everywhere.

> > If this feature is too new for the currently required makeinfo
> > version (which is it, btw?), we have two real choices:
> > 
> >  1. bump the minimum required makeinfo version so we can use it
> 
> Unfortunately sourceware tree does not build without makeinfo at all.  This is
> a pretty painful dependency on various hosts I build GDB on, I tried once to
> make the dependency optional but I do not find it so easy as I thought it is.

Since it's not, we could say that such old versions are unsupported,
and error out loudly instead.  (that is, bump the minimum required
makeinfo version, if makeinfo is in use).

> >  2. don't use the new feature
> > 
> > We could also have an @else that spells that bit out without
> > using @click/@arrow, but I don't think the benefits of a
> > clicksequence (or @arrow) justify the extra maintenance
> > burden.  IMO.
> 
> IMO it makes better quality of the output for user.  If the feature has been
> implemented and it is useful in such case it should be used.  There is no
> excuse not doing so.

The "doesn't justify the extra maintenance burden" is always a valid
excuse.  But if you and Eli think it justifies it, go for it.

> I can provide alternative less nifty graphical representation keeping the text
> even with older texinfos.

-- 
Pedro Alves


  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-10 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-09-29 19:50 [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-09 19:27 ` [commit] " Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-09 20:23   ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 13:40 ` doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames) Ulrich Weigand
2011-10-10 13:54   ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 13:58     ` Ulrich Weigand
2011-10-10 14:58       ` [patch] New test+use texinfo @click - @HAVE_MAKEINFO_CLICK@ [Re: doc build failure (Re: [patch 04/12] entryval#3: Virtual tail call frames)] Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 15:16         ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-10 15:31           ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 15:51             ` Pedro Alves [this message]
2011-10-10 18:47               ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 19:11                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 21:56                 ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-10 22:19                   ` Andreas Schwab
2011-10-11 23:34                   ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-12 15:26                     ` Pedro Alves
2011-10-12 15:56                       ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-25 14:35                     ` Joel Brobecker
2011-10-25 14:47                       ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-25 16:09                         ` Joel Brobecker
2011-10-10 16:10             ` Eli Zaretskii
2011-10-10 16:15               ` Jan Kratochvil
2011-10-10 16:09           ` Eli Zaretskii

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201110101651.00816.pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --to=pedro@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox