[rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Andrew Cagney]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 344 bytes --]

Hello,

(I'm really not sure about this one :-)

I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).

Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?

Andrew

[-- Attachment #2: diffs --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1081 bytes --]

2002-08-23  Andrew Cagney  <ac131313@redhat.com>

	* all-cfg.texi: Use @sc for GDB and GCC.  Update copyright.

Index: all-cfg.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/all-cfg.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 all-cfg.texi
--- all-cfg.texi	6 Mar 2001 08:21:41 -0000	1.2
+++ all-cfg.texi	23 Aug 2002 22:29:27 -0000
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 @c GDB MANUAL configuration file.  
-@c Copyright 1993, 1995, 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+@c
+@c Copyright 1993, 1995, 1999, 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 @c
 @c NOTE: While the GDB manual is configurable (by changing these
 @c switches), its configuration is ***NOT*** automatically tied in to
@@ -31,15 +32,14 @@
 @set GDBP gdb
 @c 
 @c Name of GDB product.  Used in running text.
-@set GDBN GDB
+@set GDBN @sc{gdb}
 @c
 @c Name of host.  Should not be used in generic configs, but generic
 @c value may catch some flubs.
 @set HOST machine specific
 @c
 @c Name of GCC product
-@set NGCC GCC
+@set NGCC @sc{gcc}
 @c 
 @c Name of GCC program
 @set GCC gcc
-

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
> 
> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
> 
> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?

There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
@sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.

Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Andrew Cagney]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 646 bytes --]

>> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
>> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
>> 
>> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
>> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
>> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
>> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
>> 
>> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?
> 
> 
> There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
> @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
> 
> Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.

So, decision time.  Trunk and 5.3 branch?

Andrew


[-- Attachment #2: mailbox-message://ac131313@movemail/fsf/gdb/patches/pending#1410604 --]
[-- Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4618 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 344 bytes --]

Hello,

(I'm really not sure about this one :-)

I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).

Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?

Andrew

[-- Attachment #2.1.2: diffs --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1081 bytes --]

2002-08-23  Andrew Cagney  <ac131313@redhat.com>

	* all-cfg.texi: Use @sc for GDB and GCC.  Update copyright.

Index: all-cfg.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/doc/all-cfg.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 all-cfg.texi
--- all-cfg.texi	6 Mar 2001 08:21:41 -0000	1.2
+++ all-cfg.texi	23 Aug 2002 22:29:27 -0000
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 @c GDB MANUAL configuration file.  
-@c Copyright 1993, 1995, 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+@c
+@c Copyright 1993, 1995, 1999, 2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
 @c
 @c NOTE: While the GDB manual is configurable (by changing these
 @c switches), its configuration is ***NOT*** automatically tied in to
@@ -31,15 +32,14 @@
 @set GDBP gdb
 @c 
 @c Name of GDB product.  Used in running text.
-@set GDBN GDB
+@set GDBN @sc{gdb}
 @c
 @c Name of host.  Should not be used in generic configs, but generic
 @c value may catch some flubs.
 @set HOST machine specific
 @c
 @c Name of GCC product
-@set NGCC GCC
+@set NGCC @sc{gcc}
 @c 
 @c Name of GCC program
 @set GCC gcc
-

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Kevin Buettner]

On Sep 26,  1:40pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> >> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
> >> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
> >> 
> >> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
> >> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
> >> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
> >> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
> >> 
> >> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?
> > 
> > 
> > There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
> > @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
> > 
> > Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.
> 
> So, decision time.  Trunk and 5.3 branch?

Having just been through this with GNU vs @sc{gnu}, I think it makes
sense to do it for GDB.

Andrew, what bothered you about the result?  (You said that you weren't
sure that you liked the final result.)

Kevin

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Andrew Cagney]

> On Sep 26,  1:40pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> 
> 
>> >> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
>> >> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
>> >> 
>> >> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
>> >> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
>> >> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
>> >> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
>> >> 
>> >> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?
> 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
>> > @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
>> > 
>> > Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.
> 
>> 
>> So, decision time.  Trunk and 5.3 branch?
> 
> 
> Having just been through this with GNU vs @sc{gnu}, I think it makes
> sense to do it for GDB.
> 
> Andrew, what bothered you about the result?  (You said that you weren't
> sure that you liked the final result.)

Generate a PDF and have a look at the title page.

Andrew

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:40:37 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
> 
> >> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
> >> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
> >> 
> >> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
> >> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
> >> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
> >> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
> >> 
> >> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?
> > 
> > 
> > There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
> > @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
> > 
> > Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.
> 
> So, decision time.  Trunk and 5.3 branch?

Fine with me.  As long as the manual can be produced in all the
supported formats without error messages, this change cannot possibly
screw up the upcoming release 5.3.

Re: [rfc/rfa:doco] Use @sc{gdb}?

[Andrew Cagney]

>> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 13:40:37 -0400
>> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
>> 
> 
>> >> Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 18:33:51 -0400
>> >> From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@ges.redhat.com>
>> >> 
>> >> I got annoyed at all the GDB's in the formatted manual being really 
>> >> large so tried changing them to @sc{gdb}.  It fixed that problem but I'm 
>> >> not sure that I like the final result :-)  (You'll need to build 
>> >> gdb.pdf, gdb ps or gdb.dvi).
>> >> 
>> >> Is there a style guide thing on this one?  Eli?
> 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > There are no strict rules on this one, AFAIK.  If the results of
>> > @sc{gdb} look nice to people, let's do it; if not, let's not.
>> > 
>> > Personally, I like the results of @sc in such cases.
> 
>> 
>> So, decision time.  Trunk and 5.3 branch?
> 
> 
> Fine with me.  As long as the manual can be produced in all the
> supported formats without error messages, this change cannot possibly
> screw up the upcoming release 5.3.

Good point.  I've committed it to just the trunk.

Andrew