From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-12194-listarch-gdb-patches=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 28752 invoked by alias); 21 Jan 2002 10:23:12 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 28660 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2002 10:23:01 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 21 Jan 2002 10:23:01 -0000
Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2])
	by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA17265;
	Mon, 21 Jan 2002 12:22:11 +0200 (IST)
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 02:23:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Sender: eliz@is
To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
cc: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [rfa/doc] tex -> texindex -> tex -> texindex -> tex
In-Reply-To: <3C4BD2CA.10407@cygnus.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1020121122030.17248A@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-SW-Source: 2002-01/txt/msg00639.txt.bz2


On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Andrew Cagney wrote:

> Noticed that the texinfo 4.0 doco mentions that, when building 
> documentation, the sequence:
> 
> 	tex
> 	texindex
> 	tex
> 	texindex
> 	tex
> 
> should be used.  The attached does this.

Which begs a question: why don't we use texi2dvi, like God intended?  
I've seen quite a few documents where the tex/texindex duet is run 
more than 2 times, until the indices converge.  Why should we 
second-guess a well-established tool such as texi2dvi?