From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id uNV8N1s6xGO+pxcAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:39:39 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id D87F31E128; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:39:39 -0500 (EST) Authentication-Results: simark.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=sourceware.org header.i=@sourceware.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=GK08OjgH; dkim-atps=neutral X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 92BBE1E0D3 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:39:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 297DB3858C1F for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 17:39:36 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 297DB3858C1F DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1673804376; bh=aEMHt9dGsvJG8CcdM9fdWMP5L/ONPqe70Lo6rY9R3po=; h=Date:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From:Reply-To:From; b=GK08OjgHkjmK90GOHewo9+0pTzYxMEuqs7XLVVqwUVJSax1jQSuTzkys7x3QEDtlK sKp8mG623kFAqdgjXMCDmg559sz8hHfKE/0u74/06sik1ejyVy9HtcXKThO3piq8xz Xais/w46a/iNjE8FoPB3fzNc5auIUalNvQr7zpj8= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B3EE3858D32 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 17:39:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 5B3EE3858D32 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pH6yQ-0007Wn-4z; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:39:14 -0500 Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pH6yP-0006jI-Jm; Sun, 15 Jan 2023 12:39:13 -0500 Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2023 19:39:19 +0200 Message-Id: <837cxn66k8.fsf@gnu.org> To: Torbjorn SVENSSON Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (message from Torbjorn SVENSSON on Sun, 15 Jan 2023 18:22:54 +0100) Subject: Re: Generated GDB documentation have colliding files on a case insensitive files system References: <831qo6u1m0.fsf@gnu.org> <778ba370-2304-bc7f-c160-9adb24c05f9b@foss.st.com> <83y1qesjys.fsf@gnu.org> <83sfgmsit3.fsf@gnu.org> <64679b6c-e318-0b7a-2dad-9a1f716f9ba8@foss.st.com> <83a62rq4jg.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces+public-inbox=simark.ca@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2023 18:22:54 +0100 > CC: > From: Torbjorn SVENSSON > > As I see it, there are 3 different options for the documentation in GDB: > > 1. Leave everything as is and forget about all users extracting a cross > built GDB with documentation and let the users deal with duplicated files... > > 2. Set the CASE_INSENSITIVE_FILENAMES option and also change one of the > anchors to have unique files. This will require Texinfo >7.0.1 that is > not yet released. > > 3. Generate one single big HTML file. This should be supported with > existing versions of Texinfo, although I haven't tested this option. > What would be needed in GDB sources is to replace the command line > option --split-size with --no-split to avoid generating more than one file. > > > What option would you prefer? I think we should rename one of the anchors, and otherwise leave things at that, because doing so will resolve the problem even without using CASE_INSENSITIVE_FILENAMES and without waiting for a future release of Texinfo, right?