Re: [PATCH, doc]: Rename Index node to prevent file collision

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Michael Hope <michael.hope@linaro.org>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:19:48 +1200
> Cc: brobecker@adacore.com, joseph@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> > I fail to understand why working around by changes in one file
> > (gdb.texinfo) is acceptable, but working around in another file
> > (makeinfo's source) is not.  I guess I'm missing something.
> 
> GDB is an active project.  Even if makeinfo was alive, it's nice to be
> able to use the tools already shipped with long term releases like
> Ubuntu 10.04.

Texinfo is actively maintained as well.  It is also nice to be able to
generate a manual without having to jump through hoops.

It simply sounds unfair that you are asking a project to fix problems
of another.

> > The problem with your suggestion is that the GDB index is not a
> > concept index, it is all the indices lumped into one.  But I would be
> > OK if we separate the concept index from the rest, and then we could
> > have "Concept Index" and "Command and Variable Index".
> 
> I'd rather not go there as it's a big change for little gain.

??? It's as simple as modifying the "@syncodeindex" directives at the
beginning of gdb.texinfo, and then adding 2 @node lines for the two
indices, instead of the current one.  All the rest will be done by
makeinfo.  Am I missing something?