Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' libgomp | wc -l
>> 136
>> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' libitm | wc -l
>> 8
>> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' gdc | wc -l
>> 7
>> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' gfc-internals | wc -l
>>
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' libgomp | wc -l
> 136
> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' libitm | wc -l
> 8
> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' gdc | wc -l
> 7
> $ grep -R 'generator.*Docutils' gfc-internals | wc -l
> 4
I yanked all these, including
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 at 19:24, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 at 13:55, Sam James wrote:
> >
> > Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> >
> > > On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > :
> > >>> ./gnat_ugn/_static/
> > >>> ./libgccjit/_static/
> > >>> ./libgdiagnostics/_static/
> > >>>
On Sat, 26 Apr 2025 at 13:55, Sam James wrote:
>
> Gerald Pfeifer writes:
>
> > On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > :
> >>> ./gnat_ugn/_static/
> >>> ./libgccjit/_static/
> >>> ./libgdiagnostics/_static/
> >>> ./libgomp/_static/
> > :
> >> N.B. there's ./jit/_static which should stay,
Gerald Pfeifer writes:
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> :
>>> ./gnat_ugn/_static/
>>> ./libgccjit/_static/
>>> ./libgdiagnostics/_static/
>>> ./libgomp/_static/
> :
>> N.B. there's ./jit/_static which should stay, because jit still uses
>> sphinx for its docs.
>
I found
https://gc
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 15:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
> >
> > Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonat
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
:
>> ./gnat_ugn/_static/
>> ./libgccjit/_static/
>> ./libgdiagnostics/_static/
>> ./libgomp/_static/
:
> N.B. there's ./jit/_static which should stay, because jit still uses
> sphinx for its docs.
I noticed onlinedocs/libgccjit/_static and it's parent
on
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> I think we want to remove these too:
Ah, thanks for pointing these out, Jonathan!
> ./gccgo/_static/
> ./gccint/_static/
> ./gdc/_static/
> ./gfc-internals/_static/
> ./gfortran/_static/
> ./gnat_rm/_static/
> ./gnat-style/_static/
> ./gnat_ugn/_static
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 15:16, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
> >
> > Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonat
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:43, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
>
> Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
>
> > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/*/
> > htdocs/onlinedoc
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Tamar Christina wrote:
> FWIW, Even though I was one of those that really liked and wanted this
> documentation update to sphinx, I agree with removing them as it is just
> confusing or misleading to users at this point.
>
> I do hope that in the future we could try to moderni
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC docs.
...which is really weird. I wonder what influenced Google's ranking here
(all the more given that there shou
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:42, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
>
> Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
>
> > $ ls -1 -d htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/*/
> > htdocs/onlinedoc
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> All these directories should have been removed two years ago:
Agreed. Thank you for digging into this and raising it, Jonathan!
> $ ls -1 -d htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/*/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/c-implementation-defined-behavior/
> htdocs/onlinedocs/gcc/ex
Hi,
On Fri, 2024-11-15 at 12:14 +, Jonathan Wakely via Gcc wrote:
> On IRC mjw suggested that you (Gerald) might object to breaking links
> by just removing them. I think the pages are already broken (the links
> in the sidebar are half missing already).
>
> If we think preserving those links
> -Original Message-
> From: Gcc On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Wakely via Gcc
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 12:25 PM
> To: Gerald Pfeifer
> Cc: gcc Mailing List
> Subject: Re: We need to remove the Sphinx HTML docs
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:22, Jonathan Wa
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:22, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> >
> > Hi Gerald,
> >
> > The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> > online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
> > docs.
> > e.g. try
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 12:14, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> Hi Gerald,
>
> The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
> online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
> docs.
> e.g. try
> https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22inline+functio
Hi Gerald,
The HTML pages from Martin Liska's Sphinx doc experiment are still
online, and Google thinks they are the canonical locatiosn for GCC
docs.
e.g. try
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22inline+function+is+as+fast+as+a+macro%22++gcc
The only hit from gcc.gnu.org is a s
19 matches
Mail list logo
