Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 10:40:06 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
cc: DJGPP-WORKERS <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: uname diff in cvs
In-Reply-To: <200005281907.VAA14621@father.ludd.luth.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000529103849.24119J-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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
Precedence: bulk


On Sun, 28 May 2000, Martin Str|mberg wrote:

> How do I get new files
> reported? -N doesn't work. It's for the wc204.txi file.

Diff it against /dev/null locally on your machine.  Since empty files
are all alike, this is good enough ;-).

> @findex uname
> Ability to detect which CPU in @file{uname.c}.

Please refer to @code{uname}, not to its file name; the latter is not
useful for users which usually don't know the names of the files.  And
it's better to make the index entries more specific, for example:

  @findex uname AT r{, CPU type detection}

This prevents a situation where there are several index entries all
saying "uname" which refer to different changes, leaving the user
wondering which one does she want to read.  (The @r thing is to force
everything but the function name to be printed in the normal font, as
opposed to the typewriter font which is the default for the @findex
entries.)

I'd also suggest to make the change description more clear, like
"Ability to report the exact CPU type..." or something similar.