This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: makeinfo version required (was: define_constraints patch, re-revised)
- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- To: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, Ranjit Mathew <rmathew at gmail dot com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 23:47:06 -0500
- Subject: Re: makeinfo version required (was: define_constraints patch, re-revised)
- References: <20060227065229.GA18445@panix.com> <4403E086.8080101@gmail.com> <20060228061310.GA15647@panix.com> <Pine.BSF.4.62.0602281138140.65792@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at> <4404A743.7010502@codesourcery.com> <Pine.BSF.4.62.0602282158310.65792@pulcherrima.dbai.tuwien.ac.at>
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 10:02:03PM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> That said, I don't really disagree about enforcing proper prerequisites to
> build GCC and its documentation, my question in this case, and in general,
> just is: Can the issue which we encountered be worked around in a simple
> way in our .texi sources, or is it important enough to warrant ramping up
> our requirements?
On reflection, @strong{} around the column headers will do; it
won't look *quite* as good in HTML and Info, but it's acceptable,
and it works with old makeinfo. I've checked in the patch below.
zw
* doc/md.texi: Avoid use of @headitem so that makeinfo <4.7
continues to work.
==================================================================
--- doc/md.texi (revision 111641)
+++ doc/md.texi (local)
@@ -3041,7 +3041,7 @@
@c the @c's prevent double blank lines in the printed manual.
@example
@multitable {Original} {Mangled}
-@headitem Original @tab Mangled @c
+@item @strong{Original} @tab @strong{Mangled} @c
@item @code{x} @tab @code{x} @c
@item @code{P42x} @tab @code{P42x} @c
@item @code{P4_x} @tab @code{P4__x} @c