This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Documenting tools necessary for GCC [draft]
- From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- To: jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2003 10:24:17 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: Documenting tools necessary for GCC [draft]
- References: <200305291727.NAA06347@caip.rutgers.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0305291835450.23254@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk> <200305300040.UAA09131@caip.rutgers.edu> <Pine.LNX.4.53.0305301006030.31797@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
> From: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28@cam.ac.uk>
>
> > Hmm, I thought the dvi files were not part of the standard "make".
> > Don't you have to say "make dvi" ? Also, I believe TeX is only
> > necessary if you "make dvi". So I'll include them in their own
> > distinct section apart from making info files with makeinfo.
>
> You said "to test your changes" - and "make dvi" is part of the required
> procedure for testing changes to the manual.
I'm curious about this requirement, when making changes to the manual
is there something that "make dvi" checks in terms of texi mistakes
that "make info" wouldn't catch?
We've already got a huge tools list. I'd like to avoid forcing people
to get and install TeX if they don't have to. And it seems to me that
if one doesn't want dvi files and if they're not part of the standard
"make install", then we should be able to say testing "make dvi" is
optional without losing any actual texi validation for changes to the
manual.
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu