From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29918 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2013 16:28:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 29880 invoked by uid 22791); 19 Feb 2013 16:28:00 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 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, 19 Feb 2013 16:27:47 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1JGRjNo030284 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:27:45 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-18.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.18]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1JGRfiw000371 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 11:27:44 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:28:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [patch+doc] New gdbinit.5 man page Message-ID: <20130219162741.GA4493@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <20130211201401.GA25391@host2.jankratochvil.net> <83621x5x7d.fsf@gnu.org> <20130212162141.GA4287@host2.jankratochvil.net> <87pq05mdqc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83lias3ybi.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83lias3ybi.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/msg00502.txt.bz2 On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 18:42:25 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I just don't see how it will make maintenance simpler. But I'm > prepared to be convinced ;-) On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 17:11:18 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Why is this better than maintaining man pages in their roff format? One reason is that mostly any other format is more convenient to write and maintain than roff. So that means to write man pages either in pod or in texinfo (or maybe in some other format but not roff). At least the content of man page for gdb/gdb_gcore.sh (/usr/bin/gcore) should be available also in texinfo as gcore's script description is currently not present in the GDB manual. Having gdb/gdb_gcore.sh man page in texinfo and other (like /usr/bin/gdb) man pages in other format seems more complicated to me than having all the man pages in single format (which is texinfo in this case). Another reason is that GDB contributors already have to know texinfo for the GDB manual updates so it means a more difficult learning curve to require another documentation format (such as pod) knowledge from contributors. Is there some reason why not to have all the GDB man pages in texinfo? Thanks, Jan