public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Torbjorn SVENSSON <>
To: Eli Zaretskii <>
Cc: <>
Subject: Re: Generated GDB documentation have colliding files on a case insensitive files system
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2023 18:22:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 2023-01-09 13:24, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2023 07:51:17 +0100
>> CC: <>
>> From: Torbjorn SVENSSON <>
>>>> I was considering if the redirect files could simply be removed from the
>>>> GDB documentation tree or if they are actually used for inter components
>>>> references.
>>> They are produced by makeinfo, and they are produced for a reason, no?
>> According to the other thread, they are generated to easy cross linking
>> the documentation. There is nothing in the documentation that will
>> generate a link to any of these files, so hence the question if they are
>> needed by GDB.
> Maybe I'm confused, but don't you above answer your own question?
> "Easy cross linking" is the reason.

Well, cross linking from other manuals.
Does this requirement jump the need to actually have all the content? :)

>>>> Even if we get a solution merged in texinfo, it will take years for it
>>>> to get activity used, and in the mean while, we are stuck with this
>>>> issue in GDB.
>>> I still don't want to make any conclusions until the Texinfo
>>> discussion is completed.  How do you know there's no solution with the
>>> existing Texinfo versions?
>> As I understood it, it was proved that the redirect pages were colliding
>> and no way around that in current implementation, but maybe I
>> misunderstood the reply...
> AFAIU, it's a bug in Texinfo.  I hope they will solve it at some
> point.
> But now let me turn the table and ask you why we as a project should
> care about HTML version of the manual being installed on MS-Windows?

I'm just seeing that there are toolchains out there that contains a 
prebuilt GCC and GDB and that they contain documentation in the form of 
HTML files. I suppose these packages could be seen as the bad part here, 
but is it really so. Can't GDB improve the way the HTML manuals are 
constructed in a way that would work regardless of where they end up?

> Having said that, I have no serious objections to changing the name of
> the anchor if it will solve the problem for you.

Looks like there will a warning emitted now when generating the HTML 
files if there are more than one anchor/node with a unique name on case 
insensitive files systems as long as the CASE_INSENSITIVE_FILENAMES 
option is set with the next version of Texinfo.

As I see it, there are 3 different options for the documentation in GDB:

1. Leave everything as is and forget about all users extracting a cross 
built GDB with documentation and let the users deal with duplicated files...

2. Set the CASE_INSENSITIVE_FILENAMES option and also change one of the 
anchors to have unique files. This will require Texinfo >7.0.1 that is 
not yet released.

3. Generate one single big HTML file. This should be supported with 
existing versions of Texinfo, although I haven't tested this option.
What would be needed in GDB sources is to replace the command line 
option --split-size with --no-split to avoid generating more than one file.

What option would you prefer?

Kind regards,

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-15 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-07  9:21 Torbjorn SVENSSON
2023-01-07  9:37 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-07  9:42   ` Torbjorn SVENSSON
2023-01-07 10:43     ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-07 10:52       ` Torbjorn SVENSSON
2023-01-07 11:08         ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-09  6:51           ` Torbjorn SVENSSON
2023-01-09 12:24             ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-15 17:22               ` Torbjorn SVENSSON [this message]
2023-01-15 17:39                 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-15 17:43                   ` Torbjorn SVENSSON
2023-01-15 18:09                     ` Eli Zaretskii

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).