X-Authentication-Warning: kendall.sfbr.org: jeffw set sender to jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org using -f Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 11:28:20 -0600 From: JT Williams To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: djasm documentation patch 2/4 Message-ID: <20010113112820.D6836@kendall.sfbr.org> Mail-Followup-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com References: <20010112143602 DOT B6051 AT kendall DOT sfbr DOT org> <200101122202 DOT RAA15516 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <2950-Sat13Jan2001094758+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <2950-Sat13Jan2001094758+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>; from eliz@is.elta.co.il on Sat, Jan 13, 2001 at 09:47:59AM +0200 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 -: > > + @node djasm, , update, Top -: > > + @include djasm.txi -: > -: > Would it be better to put the @node inside djasm.txi? I can see -: > benefits for doing it either way. -: -: I think having @node inside djasm.txi is indeed better: it makes it -: easier to change the document's structure, remove this part or move it -: around, etc. I wrote djasm.txi as a stand-alone document. To make it work with the other djgpp utility documentation I did this: - added the @node line to utils.tex (as is done for the other utilities) - added these commands @chapter djasm @lowersections as the first two lines of djasm.txi - `@ignored' the header material in djasm.txi. This allows me to @include `djasm.txi' in utils.txi with minimal changes to either document (don't break the pattern of utils.txi, and keep the original stand-alone djasm.txi document intact).