Subject: Re: texinfo files
To: Perry E. Metzger <>
From: Todd Vierling <>
List: current-users
Date: 09/23/1998 16:53:48
On Wed, 23 Sep 1998, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

: > - introduce a "doc" set to take /usr/share/doc and /usr/share/info
: I might disagree. We want a "share" set, certainly...

I propose doc, since there is a misc for most of the stuff in /usr/share,
and the doc can get ~large if, for example, we want to make plaintext
versions of the info files available in /usr/share/doc.

: > - add gtexinfo to the src/gnu/dist/texinfo tree
: > - have texinfo build, adding install-info(1), makeinfo(1) and info(1) to
: >   /usr/bin
: > - add texinfo.tex to /usr/share/misc (for TeX's benefit)
: > - make install-info(1) part of the `base' set
: > - make makeinfo(1) part of the `text' set
: Do we really need all that if we just install the "info" files
: straight from the tree?

You need install-info, of course.  You need the info file browser.  If
you're going to that trouble, it's just as well to install makeinfo too, as 
it is the only tool left that isn't installed.

If you're installing makeinfo, then, it's _better_ to auto-generate the
files, since the distributed info files with GNU tools aren't always
generated with the same version of makeinfo.  Some, for example, are missing
info directory entries. 

Plus, using makeinfo, you can make "non-split" info files; modern versions
of info(1) are decently efficient with such files, and they will reduce
clutter in /usr/share/info.

: > - make info(1) part of the `doc' set (though it may qualify for `base' as
: >   many pkgs install info files)
: probably belongs with the info files.

OK, then with the `doc' set.

: > - build the info files dynamically via makeinfo(1) and .texi files
: do we need to build them dynamically?

`See above.'

-- Todd Vierling (Personal; Bus.