X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-Id:	<5.1.0.14.2.20020226211004.027cd170@mail.dorsai.org>
X-Sender:	pjfarley AT mail DOT dorsai DOT org
X-Mailer:	QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date:	Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:15:43 -0500
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
From:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org>
Subject:	Re: Dircategories and (tex|txi|texi|texinfo]) files
Cc:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
In-Reply-To:	<2950-Tue26Feb2002094418+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References:	<5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020225192720 DOT 026a2120 AT mail DOT dorsai DOT org>
	<5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020224202214 DOT 00ab8e50 AT mail DOT dorsai DOT org>
	<5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020225192720 DOT 026a2120 AT mail DOT dorsai DOT org>
Mime-Version:	1.0
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

At 09:44 AM 2/26/02 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
 >> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 19:56:55 -0500
 >> From: "Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org>
 >>
 >> However, rather than removing the install-info entries in DSM's, 
why
 >> not just leave them all in there *with* the appropriate DJGPP
 >> section names?
 >
 >That couldn't hurt, provided that people who write the DSMs don't
 >misspell the sections ;-)

And djgpp-workers remember to test them before they're released ;-)

 >> The critical requirement for this to work is the answer to the
 >> question: What happens to info/dir when you install-info an entry 
that
 >
 >> already exists into a section that already exists?  I *hope* it 
just
 >> replaces the "old" entry in the same place, effectively leaving the 

 >> info/dir file intact.  Does it?
 >
 >Yes, it does.  But it seems like we will need to add more section
 >headers in our DIR.  Consider this snippet from DIR:
<Snipped>
 >This means that all of Findutils, Flex, and other utilities after
 >Flex, are all counted in the "Disk usage" section, which is an utter
 >nonsense.

Understood.  But updating the DJGPP info/dir sections will solve that 
problem, won't it?

 >> leaving the install-info commands in DSM files (with
 >> appropriate --section and/or --entry arguments) has the added
 >advantage
 >> of letting "new" ports get into info/dir in the right place, even
 >> before they get "officially" added in the CVS info/dir.
 >
 >But they bump into problems with the lack of proper sections, as I
 >explain above.  So, on balance, I'd suggest to use install-info in a
 >DSM only when absolutely needed.

Unless the DJGPP info/dir sections get corrected.

 >> Which is the "right" thing to do, and which I may indeed do for a 
few
 >> of the packages myself.  But what "categories" do we recommend to 
the
 >> GNU maintainer: The ones in the "standard"?
 >
 >As long as that's their standard, yes.
 >
 >> I'd make up and use a very different list than theirs.
 >
 >That is okay, but first the different list should be approved by the
 >GNU Powers That Be.  So please send the suggestions to change that
 >list to bug-texinfo AT gnu DOT org, and it probably makes sense to CC 
Richard
 >Stallman at some point, since he maintains the standards document.

OK, I already sent a note to bug-standards AT gnu DOT org, but no reply 
yet.  If I don't get one, I'll post my suggestions to bug-texinfo.
---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
                      pjfarley3 AT escape DOT com)

- Raw text -