Re: bootstrap/7817: [3.2/3.3 regression] Link to gcc man page in g++ man page incorrect

Re: bootstrap/7817: [3.2/3.3 regression] Link to gcc man page in g++ man page incorrect

[Steven Bosscher]

The following reply was made to PR bootstrap/7817; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, backes@rhrk.uni-kl.de,
	gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, aoliva@redhat.com
Cc:  
Subject: Re: bootstrap/7817: [3.2/3.3 regression] Link to gcc man page in
 g++ man page incorrect
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 07:47:53 +0100

 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=7817
 
 Alexandre, does your patch "get g++ man page to point to the right gcc 
 man page" (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg01043.html) fix 
 this high priority PR? If  so, can the patch go on the 3.3 branch too?
 
 Greetz
 Steven
 
 

Re: bootstrap/7817: [3.2/3.3 regression] Link to gcc man page in g++ man page incorrect

[Alexandre Oliva]

The following reply was made to PR bootstrap/7817; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
To: Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl>
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org, backes@rhrk.uni-kl.de, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
   nobody@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bootstrap/7817: [3.2/3.3 regression] Link to gcc man page in g++ man page incorrect
Date: 12 Mar 2003 04:05:33 -0300

 On Mar 12, 2003, Steven Bosscher <s.bosscher@student.tudelft.nl> wrote:
 
 > Alexandre, does your patch "get g++ man page to point to the right gcc
 > man page" (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-03/msg01043.html)
 > fix this high priority PR? If  so, can the patch go on the 3.3 branch
 > too?
 
 Hmm...  I'm afraid not.  The bug report describes a different problem,
 that I wasn't even aware of.  I can't duplicate the problem on my
 GNU/Linux box, and IRIX 6.5's man just says it fails to support `.so',
 and since I'm mostly clueless as far as man-pages go, I'm not sure
 whether .so is supposed to list a pathname relative to the location of
 the file that contains the directive or the pathname is searched in
 the MANPATH.  Current behavior seems to indicate the latter, but the
 bug report seems to imply this is not portable.  Installing the gcc
 man-page as g++.1 is probably as good a solution as any.  I don't
 quite like the idea of installing a soft-link because soft links are
 not that portable, and the fallback on systems that don't support it
 is copying, which may not do the right think if g++.1 is installed
 before gcc.1.
 
 -- 
 Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
 Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
 CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
 Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer