Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <20020417020003.43107.qmail@web20006.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 19:00:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joshua Daniel Franklin <joshuadfranklin AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject: cygwin-doc and newlib
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

In-Reply-To: <20020416031430 DOT GC25464 AT redhat DOT com>

> But, where would the user find the info file?  It isn't in any distribution
> yet.

OK, the bad news is 
1. newlib doesn't have any real texinfo documentation.
   There's headers, for example /oss/src/newlib/libm/libm.texinfo, but
   the info pages are generated by a 'makedoc' similar to cygwin's 'doctool'
   except that it produces straight info files--not texinfo. None of the
   function synopses, for example, are in that file
   (BTW I don't understand this; isn't the cygwin package cross-compiled?)
2. The current newlib documentation IS in the distribution; it's in the
   cygwin package in the files: /usr/info/libc.info*, libm.info
   In other words you can't get 'info isalpha', you have to do 'info libc' then
   search for 'isalpha'
3. I found an info2man script that works, but does a horrible job. Everything
   is in one big file ('man libc') and is not properly formatted
4. Even the GNU stuff that uses texi2man requires
   special tags like '@c ifman ...blah blah' to get properly formatted man
   pages.

However, the good news is that since info files are well-formatted it 
looks like it would be relatively easy to write a script that created 
separate man pages for each function. But it will take time. So...

> I don't want to be pushy but I would really prefer that you incorporate
> the newlib stuff via either 1) or 2) (2 preferred).  I foresee confusion
> otherwise.

I'm not following this. What's the confusion in having a completely new
package that doesn't effect in any way newlib-man? Later I can add a the 
newlib stuff and note it in the announcement.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/