Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com> writes: >> As an example, let's take this link: >> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-12.2.0/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wpedantic >> This should place you below the item line this index entry refers to, >> and there aren't any copiable anchors (see equivalent in my render for >> an example of those), both of which were often named as annoyances with >> the onlinedocs while the Sphinx experiment was taking place. >> A similar thing happens in the standalone and Emacs info viewers (but >> that's less noticeable there since the cursor is placed in the middle of >> the screen when jumping to an index entry there). Try, for instance, >> 'info gcc Wpedantic' (your cursor will be placed just below the item >> line). >> The fix for the first of these issues should already be applied by >> Gerald (in the reordering commits, IIRC at least, save for one that I >> created later because someone snuck in new "misplaced" indices), and >> that fix should also fix up previous versions of Texinfo. >> Even with this change, the copiable anchors will remain missing since >> released Texinfo versions lack some AST transformations that enable >> those. > > OK, I can see the difference there between the current online docs, the set > you > produced with the unreleased Texinfo support, and what I got building with > Texinfo 6.7. > >> Otherwise, manuals should work fine with older releases, unless I missed >> something when refactoring @defbuiltin and removing @gols (which I do >> believe are superfluous with current versions of texinfo.tex, which is >> why I bumped that too). > > I did a few spot-checks here and there of those changes. I saw a couple of > line break problems but they turn out to be due to existing errors in the > .texi > files that were not introduced by your (mostly mechanical) changes.
Thanks. I tried to check all usage sites of @gol in PDF output too, to make sure its removal didn't have a negative impact, but I only tested new makeinfo and the texinfo.tex I pushed to my branch (2023-01-17.19). I expect the version of makeinfo to have no impact for that output, since it should just offload to texi2dvi. >> FWIW, I (briefly) tested with Texinfo 6.0, and output seems okay. On >> 5.0, I got a few warnings, but I think even 6.0 is apt considering its >> age. I haven't given it a proper scrutiny, though (workdays are busy >> this time of year..). > > Texinfo 6.0 was released in 2015, 5.0 in 2013. FWIW, Trusty Tahr (the current > oldest Ubuntu LTS release) has 5.2. 4.7 was released in 2004, I don't know > why > anyone would still be trying to use that unless it's needed for building > legacy > code from the same era. Heh, I hadn't realized how far back LTS releases go.. I don't think there's any new language constructs that the GCC manual could make use of currently, so it shouldn't be too difficult to retain at least a "builds with diagnostics" level of support for those versions. > I think we could do away with the requirement for a specific minimum version, > and make install.texi say something similar to what it says for e.g. awk -- > just use a "recent" version, and note that new versions produce better output > and very old ones may produce diagnostics. I'll add that do my own todo list. That seems reasonable, thanks. > -Sandra -- Arsen Arsenović
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
