From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23077 invoked by alias); 18 Mar 2008 22:09:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 23069 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Mar 2008 22:09:12 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (HELO merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de) (131.220.223.13) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:08:50 +0000 Received: from localhost.localdomain (xdsl-87-78-167-243.netcologne.de [87.78.167.243]) by merkur.ins.uni-bonn.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B1D440002240; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:08:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from ralf by localhost.localdomain with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Jbjz8-0001Ol-Ch; Tue, 18 Mar 2008 23:08:42 +0100 Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:27:00 -0000 From: Ralf Wildenhues To: Arnaud Charlet Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, ADA, DOC] PR 15479: Crossrefs and links Message-ID: <20080318220842.GH2094@ins.uni-bonn.de> Mail-Followup-To: Ralf Wildenhues , Arnaud Charlet , gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org References: <20080315135145.GG17579@ins.uni-bonn.de> <20080316182210.GA37514@adacore.com> <20080316220220.GA3899@ins.uni-bonn.de> <20080317075928.GA90987@adacore.com> <20080317191116.GB22463@ins.uni-bonn.de> <20080318075330.GC82298@adacore.com> <20080318214745.GG2094@ins.uni-bonn.de> <20080318220220.GA17497@adacore.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080318220220.GA17497@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-03/txt/msg01101.txt.bz2 * Arnaud Charlet wrote on Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 11:02:20PM CET: > > Should it still be possible to build the VMS version of the User's Guide > > as well as the UNW version using xgnatugn, > > Yes. But both will never end up under the same directory, so they can end > up with the same name. OK, but ... > > but both should now have the > > same name? Or should just the UNW version be renamed to gnat_ugn.info? > > Should it still be possible with xgnatugn to generate an UNW version > > with the gnat_ugn_unw name? > > Preferably, yes. ... this requires that we need at least one other substitution (the @setfilename must be choosable as gnat_ugn or gnat_ugn_unw for the UNW version), which kind of contradicts with this requirement: > In other words, if you could keep xgnatugn as it is today, > that'd be easier to handle. Cheers, Ralf