Re: 98-factored-install-info.patch

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:

Akim> It was bizarre to support install-info, but not uninstall-info.
Akim> In addition, install-info, being non regular, was taking risks,
Akim> such as not working properly in the case of recursives
Akim> directories (not that it actually really matters), and was
Akim> indeed broken in this respect.

install-info is a somewhat losing target.  One reason we use it is
that the infamous "Cygnus" tree uses it.  Apparently other people use
it too.

I don't really want to propagate its use.  It is good to make it work,
and you can make uninstall-info if you really want.  However I don't
see a real need for it.  If we do add it I'd prefer we not document
it.

My understanding is that install-info exists because the early GNU
Makefile hackers didn't think of install-data, or didn't want to
implement it for some reason.  So they made install-info instead.

Also note the extremely losing `no-installinfo' option, which makes it
so info pages aren't installed by `make install' but only by `make
install-info'.  I think uninstall will always uninstall the info page
regardless of this option.

It's all pretty lame.

Akim>   Make the installation/uninstallation of Info pages follow the
Akim>   regular am/recursive scheme.

Ok, but you can remove uninstall-info unless you really like it.

Tom