From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18016 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2013 16:22:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 18002 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Feb 2013 16:21:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:21:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1CGLjfD012287 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:21:45 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1CGLfAO002243 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 11:21:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:22:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch+doc] New gdbinit.5 man page Message-ID: <20130212162141.GA4287@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130211201401.GA25391@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83621x5x7d.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83621x5x7d.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2013-02/txt/msg00274.txt.bz2 On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:11:18 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I do not necessarily object, but what would be the purpose of this? > Why is this better than maintaining man pages in their roff format? It is in fact Tom's idea to make the man pages in texinfo: Re: [patch] gdb_gcore man/help/install [+doc] #2 http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-12/msg00659.html Message-ID: > We still need an info node for invoking gcore. But that may have applied only to gcore (/usr/bin/gcore) which currently does not have its gdb.texinfo description. You are right gdbinit files are already described in gdb.texinfo. But then: [patch] gdb_gcore man/help/install [+doc] #2 http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/2011-12/msg00157.html Message-ID: <20111206002555.GA12329@host2.jankratochvil.net> > From the practical point of view with the goal to generate only the nroff .1 > format I think the choice is clear from nroff, pod and texinfo. > The most simple format for maintenance is pod. Therefore I did not use > texi2pod at all. nroff is not well writable + maintainable format. And writing some man pages (like gdbinit.5) in pod and other man pages (like gdbcore.1) in texinfo seems to be needlessly complicated to me, then I find texinfo-for-all as the most simple way to got forward. I already wrote gcore.1 in nroff, gcore.1 in pod and now gdbinit.5 in texinfo se we have already looped back while choosing the right format... Jan