Date:	Sun, 21 Jan 2001 20:03:04 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Message-Id:	<1659-Sun21Jan2001200304+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<3A6B1D8C.86A1ADF1@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (message from Richard
	Dawe on Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:34:04 +0000)
Subject:	Re: Describe @portability in develop.txi [Was: Re: mkdoc patch, take 2]
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000711100538 DOT 19180B-100000 AT is> <396B6BB3 DOT 49C1F993 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3A6B08A1 DOT D3F04FDE AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <2950-Sun21Jan2001190611+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3A6B1D8C DOT 86A1ADF1 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:34:04 +0000
> From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > It might be better to use @acronym for ANSI and POSIX.  It's not a
> > requirement, though; it's up to you.  (Personally, I think @acronym
> > looks much better in print.)
> 
> '@acronym' appeared in texinfo 4.0, according to the news file
> (gnu/texinfo4.0/news). Do we require texinfo 4.0 to build DJGPP now?

I think we always required the latest one.

> Thanks, I've fixed & tested those links now. There's a new diff below. OK
> to commit now?

Yes.

- Raw text -