Re: alternative "info" reader (was: kernel makeoptions)

["Thomas Mueller" <mueller6724%bellsouth.net@localhost>]

from Chuck Swiger <cswiger%mac.com@localhost>:

> It may help to understand that info documentation was chosen as an 
> alternative to roff macros by RMS and the GNU project since it provided 
> better indexing and cross-linking.  This was long
+before the web existed or folks processing manpages (ie, the "See also" 
section) into HTML documents with working hyperlinks.

>From that central point, two major consequences should be noted:

> 1) Info docs were designed to be written and read in emacs; info is a 
> stand-alone reader program which uses emacs-like keybindings.  If you get 
> emacs, you should be fine in info.  If you
> +don't understand emacs, well, info is likely to be obscure also.

> 2) All GNU software uses info as the primary means of documentation.  While a 
> few GNU project maintainers try to keep manpages updated, the manpages for 
> most GNU software (ie, the compiler
> +toolchain) are outdated and are updated infrequently compared to the info 
> docs.  Often by volunteers from the BSD community, who do tend to prefer 
> manpages...  :-)

> Considering that the NetBSD project is either stuck with gcc-4.2 & 
> binutils-2.17, or has to adopt GPLv3 to go with gcc-4.3+ & binutils-2.20+, 
> folks might want to give some thought to
> +Clang/LLVM as an alternative.

> Regards,

> -Chuck

I tried with emacs, but all the elisp was too much to remember.  I do better 
with vi.

I had been using EPM (Enhanced Editor) in OS/2 Warp 4 until its chkdsk ran amok 
and trashed my hard-drive data in April 2001; was never again able to boot OS/2 
after that.

HTML with lynx works much better than info; these info or man pages have no 
graphics to be lost with lynx.

I was wondering why NetBSD pkgsrc remains behind with gcc, binutils and 
coreutils, and has no util-linux or util-linux-ng.

FreeBSD ports offers development snapshots of GCC 4.5.3 and 4.6.

Tom