[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version)

From: Richard Stallman
Subject: Re: Documentation for "Clone Buffers" (corrected version)
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 13:01:26 -0500

    The underlying issue, to my knowledge, is that for info to be as
    convenient as man, it needs to have dir entries for every command, every
    function, etc.

I think the command names should be entries in an index, rather than
entries in the info directory.

      It's obviously not useful for the user to have to browse
    through a dir node with 1700 entries from glibc.

I'm not sure what you mean here.  Are you envisioning the idea that
the libc manual could create an entry in the info dir for each library
function?  I see no reason to put them in the info directory; it's
better to put them in an index, which is where they are already.

However I am puzzled that you go on to speak of this as if it were
already fact:

      On the other hand, I
    can't exactly call it a "bug" in the glibc manual, it's trying to do the
    only thing available.

What exactly are you saying is not a bug?  What do you mean by "the
only thing available"?  What is that thing?  Available for what?

    The only long-term solution I've been able to think of is to allow
    subnodes of (dir) and have the info readers look through the subnodes
    when asked for a given top-level name -- but not load or display the
    info in all the subnodes when showing the dir node itself.

I think we need commands that find specific index nodes and look up
names in them.  There would be one for commands, one for library
functions, and so on.  This is the same idea as the structure of
sections of the unix manual, but we need not name them by numbers.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]