This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Patch to update Service instructions in gcc.texi
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Subject: Re: Patch to update Service instructions in gcc.texi
- From: Jeffrey A Law <law at redhat dot com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 00:55:07 -0700
- cc: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Reply-To: law at redhat dot com
In message <Pine.LNX.4.30.0011071233290.6565-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.a
c.uk>you write:
> On Tue, 7 Nov 2000, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
>
> > Except...
> >
> > > +For further information, see
> > > +@uref{http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/fom.cgi?file=12}.
> >
> > ...which seems to volatile (an address).
>
> So what is the recommended practice for refering to individual FAQ
> entries?
I haven't found a convention that I really like. Referring to the file #
seems to be the least of various evils.
> Does the FOM renumber existing entries or assign previously used
> numbers to new entries?
No, it doesn't renumber or reuse file #s.
jeff