Re: Links to web pages are broken.

[Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 16:58, Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 10.11.2022 um 17:45 schrieb Georg-Johann Lay <avr@gjlay.de>:
> >
> > 
> >
> >> Am 10.11.22 um 16:25 schrieb Jonathan Wakely:
> >>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 15:23, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 at 15:17, Georg-Johann Lay <avr@gjlay.de> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Am 10.11.22 um 16:05 schrieb Martin Liška:
> >>>>> On 11/10/22 15:45, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi, I just observed that links like
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ceased to work.  Presumably this is to sphinx stuff, but it would be
> >>>>>> great if not hundreds of links across the web to GCC pages like the
> >>>>>> above would be 404.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I know that the new link is
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configuration.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> but that doesn't help with existing pointers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Deep" links like https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configuration.html#avr
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> won't work either, so all reasonable anchors have been ditched, too?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Johann
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hello.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We're working on that and we'll create a redirection:
> >>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107610
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for pointing out.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Martin
> >>>>
> >>>> Ok thanks, I left a note there.
> >>>
> >>> The second part of your note about deep links into the new docs is a
> >>> completely separate issue. That can't be fixed with HTTP redirects for
> >>> the old URLs.
> >> And there are still anchors, they're just different:
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configuration.html#cmdoption-with-avrlibc
> >> Now there are anchors to every single option, which is much better
> >> than it used to be.
> >
> > Yes, its nice.  But existing links are still invalidated.  Just take some tutorial that explains how to set up gcc, where you want to provide references that are point-on and not just "gcc.gnu.org".
> >
> > Does this also mean that "deep" links to onlinedocs won't work any more?
>
> How about moving the new docs to
> onlinedocs-new/ and simply keeping the old
> Doc tree around?  Re-using the old dir looks like a mistake in hindsight?

Maybe just "docs" or "trunkdocs" or "latestdocs" instead of
"onlinedocs-new", since that is (1) very long, and (2) will look silly
in ten years when it's not new and we need to add
onlinedocs-even-newer ;-)

Or even onlinedocs/latest/ for the new stuff, and leave the old stuff
there in onlinedocs/ (without linking to it) so that old links work.