GNU bug report logs -
#13965
info.info conflict between emacs and texinfo
Previous Next
To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 13965 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 13965 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:05:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> linux-m68k.org>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org.
(Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:05:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Both emacs and texinfo install the info.info info file. This needs to
be resolved.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:44:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Both emacs and texinfo install the info.info info file. This needs to
be resolved.
Fine, I'll remove it from Texinfo, since in practice info.texi has been
maintained in Emacs for many years. (I've been copying it from the
latest Emacs distribution before making a Texinfo release.)
k
Merged 13965 14064.
Request was from
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:02:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:06:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #13 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Karl Berry wrote:
> Both emacs and texinfo install the info.info info file. This needs to
> be resolved.
Why does it matter? It is the same file, just provided by two packages.
> Fine, I'll remove it from Texinfo, since in practice info.texi has been
> maintained in Emacs for many years.
Oh, it has? :)
It seems slightly weird for me if the canonical home for info.texi
becomes Emacs rather than Texinfo...
Not that it changes very often, but AFAIK no-one here at Emacs was
paying particular attention to it wrt accuracy, bugs, etc.
> (I've been copying it from the latest Emacs distribution before
> making a Texinfo release.)
:)
Severity set to 'minor' from 'normal'
Request was from
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:06:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:10:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #18 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
PS AFAIK, the only reason it is in Emacs is because of MS Windows users.
I doubt anyone on POSIX platforms uses info pages without having texinfo
installed.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:39:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #21 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:07:11 -0400
> Cc: 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, bug-texinfo <at> gnu.org
>
>
> PS AFAIK, the only reason it is in Emacs is because of MS Windows users.
> I doubt anyone on POSIX platforms uses info pages without having texinfo
> installed.
I think it's for anyone who doesn't have Texinfo installed. I agree
that Windows users are more likely to not have it, though.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 31 Mar 2013 23:25:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #24 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Glenn,
Why does it matter? It is the same file, just provided by two packages.
I know. I keep them synced. It's Andreas's request, not mine.
The current situation is totally not a problem in my own life, but I can
imagine it creating a discrepancy when there is version skew and a new
version of texinfo|emacs is released and has a different version of
info.texi than the existing installed emacs|texinfo on the system.
Oh, it has? :)
Yes, it has. The few changes that have been made in the past N years
have been made in Emacs. If I had anything to change, I would change it
in Emacs too.
karl
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Mon, 01 Apr 2013 07:15:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #27 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
karl <at> freefriends.org (Karl Berry) writes:
> I know. I keep them synced.
No, you don't.
--- texinfo-5.1/doc/info.texi 2013-02-19 23:25:28.000000000 +0100
+++ emacs-24.3/doc/misc/info.texi 2013-01-01 21:37:17.000000000 +0100
@@ -14,25 +14,18 @@
This file describes how to use Info, the on-line, menu-driven GNU
documentation system.
-Copyright @copyright{} 1989, 1992, 1996-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Copyright @copyright{} 1989, 1992, 1996--2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
@quotation
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no
-Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU
-Manual,'' and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the
-license is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation
-License'' in the Emacs manual.
+Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU Manual,''
+and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation License''.
(a) The FSF's Back-Cover Text is: ``You have the freedom to copy and
-modify this GNU manual. Buying copies from the FSF supports it in
-developing GNU and promoting software freedom.''
-
-This document is part of a collection distributed under the GNU Free
-Documentation License. If you want to distribute this document
-separately from the collection, you can do so by adding a copy of the
-license to the document, as described in section 6 of the license.
+modify this GNU manual.''
@end quotation
@end copying
@@ -78,12 +71,13 @@
@end ifinfo
@end ifnottex
-@insertcopying
+@insertcopying
@menu
* Getting Started:: Getting started using an Info reader.
* Advanced:: Advanced Info commands.
* Expert Info:: Info commands for experts.
+* GNU Free Documentation License:: The license for this documentation.
* Index:: An index of topics, commands, and variables.
@end menu
@@ -264,7 +258,7 @@
@format
>> If you are in Emacs and have a mouse, and if you already practiced
- typing @kbd{n} to get to the next node, click now with the left
+ typing @kbd{n} to get to the next node, click now with the left
mouse button on the @samp{Next} link to do the same ``the mouse way''.
@end format
@@ -324,7 +318,7 @@
we call ``Backspace or DEL'' in this manual is labeled differently on
different keyboards. Look for a key which is a little ways above the
@key{ENTER} or @key{RET} key and which you normally use outside Emacs
-to erase the character before the cursor, i.e.@: the character you
+to erase the character before the cursor, i.e., the character you
typed last. It might be labeled @samp{Backspace} or @samp{<-} or
@samp{DEL}, or sometimes @samp{Delete}.} and @kbd{b} commands exist to
allow you to ``move around'' in a node that does not all fit on the
@@ -1504,6 +1498,10 @@
To check an Info file, do @kbd{M-x Info-validate} while looking at any
node of the file with Emacs Info mode.
+@node GNU Free Documentation License
+@appendix GNU Free Documentation License
+@include doclicense.texi
+
@node Index
@unnumbered Index
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Mon, 01 Apr 2013 22:38:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #30 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
No, you don't.
Evidently I messed up for texinfo 5.1. Sorry. Shoot me.
+@include doclicense.texi
How about naming the file fdl.texi, like virtually every other package does?
k
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Tue, 02 Apr 2013 07:47:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #33 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
thank you for that patch.
Does it mean that info.texi will be delivered by Emacs instead of texlive?
At the begging of that "bug" was mentioned that info.texi should be part
of texlive.
I am little bit confused what is final solution.
From last messages of that thread is seen that info.texi will be part
of emacs package definitelly, right?
S pozdravem / Best regards
Petr Hracek
On 04/01/2013 09:11 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
> karl <at> freefriends.org (Karl Berry) writes:
>
>> I know. I keep them synced.
> No, you don't.
>
> --- texinfo-5.1/doc/info.texi 2013-02-19 23:25:28.000000000 +0100
> +++ emacs-24.3/doc/misc/info.texi 2013-01-01 21:37:17.000000000 +0100
> @@ -14,25 +14,18 @@
> This file describes how to use Info, the on-line, menu-driven GNU
> documentation system.
>
> -Copyright @copyright{} 1989, 1992, 1996-2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> +Copyright @copyright{} 1989, 1992, 1996--2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> @quotation
> Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
> under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or
> any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no
> -Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU
> -Manual,'' and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the
> -license is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation
> -License'' in the Emacs manual.
> +Invariant Sections, with the Front-Cover texts being ``A GNU Manual,''
> +and with the Back-Cover Texts as in (a) below. A copy of the license
> +is included in the section entitled ``GNU Free Documentation License''.
>
> (a) The FSF's Back-Cover Text is: ``You have the freedom to copy and
> -modify this GNU manual. Buying copies from the FSF supports it in
> -developing GNU and promoting software freedom.''
> -
> -This document is part of a collection distributed under the GNU Free
> -Documentation License. If you want to distribute this document
> -separately from the collection, you can do so by adding a copy of the
> -license to the document, as described in section 6 of the license.
> +modify this GNU manual.''
> @end quotation
> @end copying
>
> @@ -78,12 +71,13 @@
> @end ifinfo
> @end ifnottex
>
> -@insertcopying
> +@insertcopying
>
> @menu
> * Getting Started:: Getting started using an Info reader.
> * Advanced:: Advanced Info commands.
> * Expert Info:: Info commands for experts.
> +* GNU Free Documentation License:: The license for this documentation.
> * Index:: An index of topics, commands, and variables.
> @end menu
>
> @@ -264,7 +258,7 @@
>
> @format
> >> If you are in Emacs and have a mouse, and if you already practiced
> - typing @kbd{n} to get to the next node, click now with the left
> + typing @kbd{n} to get to the next node, click now with the left
> mouse button on the @samp{Next} link to do the same ``the mouse way''.
> @end format
>
> @@ -324,7 +318,7 @@
> we call ``Backspace or DEL'' in this manual is labeled differently on
> different keyboards. Look for a key which is a little ways above the
> @key{ENTER} or @key{RET} key and which you normally use outside Emacs
> -to erase the character before the cursor, i.e.@: the character you
> +to erase the character before the cursor, i.e., the character you
> typed last. It might be labeled @samp{Backspace} or @samp{<-} or
> @samp{DEL}, or sometimes @samp{Delete}.} and @kbd{b} commands exist to
> allow you to ``move around'' in a node that does not all fit on the
> @@ -1504,6 +1498,10 @@
> To check an Info file, do @kbd{M-x Info-validate} while looking at any
> node of the file with Emacs Info mode.
>
> +@node GNU Free Documentation License
> +@appendix GNU Free Documentation License
> +@include doclicense.texi
> +
> @node Index
> @unnumbered Index
>
>
> Andreas.
>
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Tue, 02 Apr 2013 16:16:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #36 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Karl Berry wrote:
> +@include doclicense.texi
>
> How about naming the file fdl.texi, like virtually every other package does?
If it really helps you, we could rename it. We'll have to change 58
files, several of which also live in other repositories.
It won't make any difference to this issue (I assume), because it is
info.info that is the problem, not info.texi. So I think you could just
live with that difference. And in any case, trying to make the Texinfo
and Emacs info.infos literally identical is never going to work IMO. We
can never be sure that the installed versions of Texinfo and Emacs are
going to match.
My suggestion is that you and Emacs do nothing, and leave the people
packaging Texinfo and Emacs to sort this out.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Tue, 02 Apr 2013 16:20:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #39 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Petr Hracek wrote:
> Does it mean that info.texi will be delivered by Emacs instead of texlive?
> At the begging of that "bug" was mentioned that info.texi should be
> part of texlive.
Texinfo, not texlive.
> I am little bit confused what is final solution.
>
> From last messages of that thread is seen that info.texi will be part
> of emacs package definitelly, right?
My suggestion is that you just unconditionally remove info.info from the
files that the Emacs rpm installs. It makes sense for both upstreams to
have it, but if that causes problems for you, I think the better home
for it is the Texinfo rpm. Maybe make the Emacs rpm suggest Texinfo?
(Probably not worth bothering.)
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:29:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #42 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
If it really helps you, we could rename it.
Well, obviously it is not a stopper. I can edit the file when I import
it and ignore that difference.
We'll have to change 58 files, several of which also live in other
repositories.
The point is that nearly every other package in GNU uses fdl.texi (as
far as I have seen). Why should Emacs use a different name for the
file? It just seems wrong.
It won't make any difference to this issue (I assume),
Indeed.
k
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Wed, 03 Apr 2013 00:28:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #45 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Karl Berry wrote:
> The point is that nearly every other package in GNU uses fdl.texi (as
> far as I have seen). Why should Emacs use a different name for the
> file?
No reason other than history/inertia AFAIK. It's always been
"doclicense.texi", for ~ 13 years now.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:17:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #48 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
you are right, texinfo.
emacs rpm package depends on texinfo and therefore info.info.gz page
will be removed from emacs package.
What about patch which delivered Andreas?
info.texi was removed from texinfo-5.1?
--- texinfo-5.1/doc/info.texi 2013-02-19 23:25:28.000000000 +0100
+++ emacs-24.3/doc/misc/info.texi 2013-01-01 21:37:17.000000000 +0100
I think that there will be inconsistency.
I think that info.texi should be part of texinfo, right?
@Andreas: did you apply that patch on emacs trunk?
Cool and thanks:)
S pozdravem / Best regards
Petr Hracek
On 04/02/2013 06:16 PM, Glenn Morris wrote:
> Petr Hracek wrote:
>
>> Does it mean that info.texi will be delivered by Emacs instead of texlive?
>> At the begging of that "bug" was mentioned that info.texi should be
>> part of texlive.
> Texinfo, not texlive.
>
>> I am little bit confused what is final solution.
>>
>> From last messages of that thread is seen that info.texi will be part
>> of emacs package definitelly, right?
> My suggestion is that you just unconditionally remove info.info from the
> files that the Emacs rpm installs. It makes sense for both upstreams to
> have it, but if that causes problems for you, I think the better home
> for it is the Texinfo rpm. Maybe make the Emacs rpm suggest Texinfo?
> (Probably not worth bothering.)
Added tag(s) wontfix.
Request was from
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Fri, 05 Apr 2013 17:32:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Sat, 04 May 2013 11:24:06 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
bug unarchived.
Request was from
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
to
control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:15:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 17 Oct 2015 19:56:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #57 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On 15 October 2015 at 21:31, Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Karl Berry <karl <at> freefriends.org> writes:
>
>> It's fine with me for it to be maintained in texinfo, but if the Emacs
>> people are happy with that. Andreas?
>>
>> For myself, I don't actually care what happens, if anything - included
>> in Emacs, included in Texinfo, included in both, it's all the same to
>> me. Whatever everyone will be satisfied with ...
>
> This is still not resolved. Having it installed by different packages
> is bad since you get a file conflict.
I've removed it from Texinfo, for now. Unless it's changed back, the
file will not be present in the next Texinfo release.
PS last time I copied debbugs the mail bounced, saying the bug was closed.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 17 Oct 2015 21:40:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #60 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Gavin Smith wrote:
> I've removed it from Texinfo, for now. Unless it's changed back, the
> file will not be present in the next Texinfo release.
I'm sure there are many systems where Texinfo is installed and Emacs is not.
How are people on those systems supposed to learn how to use the
stand-alone info reader?
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sat, 17 Oct 2015 22:29:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #63 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On 17 October 2015 at 22:38, Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> Gavin Smith wrote:
>
>> I've removed it from Texinfo, for now. Unless it's changed back, the
>> file will not be present in the next Texinfo release.
>
> I'm sure there are many systems where Texinfo is installed and Emacs is not.
> How are people on those systems supposed to learn how to use the
> stand-alone info reader?
It has its own manual. It doesn't have a tutorial, though. This would
have to be added. It shouldn't be hard to cover the absolute minimum
needed to be able to navigate through the rest of the manual.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 18:06:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #66 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Gavin Smith wrote:
>> I'm sure there are many systems where Texinfo is installed and Emacs is not.
>> How are people on those systems supposed to learn how to use the
>> stand-alone info reader?
>
> It has its own manual. It doesn't have a tutorial, though. This would
> have to be added. It shouldn't be hard to cover the absolute minimum
> needed to be able to navigate through the rest of the manual.
info.info is obviously written to benefit users of both Emacs info and
stand-alone info. It seems weird to me to delete it from Texinfo just
for the sake of a distribution packing issue that
i) doesn't occur on Debian-based systems
(http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#30)
ii) was solved two-years ago on RedHat-based systems in the rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927996#c11
If I were packaging Emacs for a distribution (let me randomly say SUSE),
I'd resolve this issue in the packaging step. But I'm just repeating
myself (http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#33). Obviously it's your decision.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:30:05 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #69 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> writes:
> i) doesn't occur on Debian-based systems
> (http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#30)
Wrong. You get different behaviour depending on how you search for info
files.
> ii) was solved two-years ago on RedHat-based systems in the rpm
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927996#c11
This is even worse: two files with the same menu entry in the same info
directory.
> If I were packaging Emacs for a distribution (let me randomly say SUSE),
> I'd resolve this issue in the packaging step. But I'm just repeating
> myself (http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#33). Obviously it's your decision.
Two packages fighting for the same file is bad. Each time one package
is installed the other one is overwritten.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, schwab <at> linux-m68k.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:32:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #72 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Glenn Morris wrote:
> ii) was solved two-years ago on RedHat-based systems in the rpm
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927996#c11
PS I don't think that's a great solution, but I guess it's good enough.
So if there's any interest in Texinfo retaining info.info, then Andreas,
I suggest you make that change in the Emacs sources (ie, make Emacs
install plain "info", like it used to, not "info.info").
But if no-one feels that Texinfo needs it, then no need to bother.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:35:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #75 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Two packages fighting for the same file is bad.
Someone once told me that these things happen, and should be solved in
the packages, not the source.
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-03/msg01211.html
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:42:01 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #78 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On 18 October 2015 at 19:05, Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> Gavin Smith wrote:
>
>>> I'm sure there are many systems where Texinfo is installed and Emacs is not.
>>> How are people on those systems supposed to learn how to use the
>>> stand-alone info reader?
>>
>> It has its own manual. It doesn't have a tutorial, though. This would
>> have to be added. It shouldn't be hard to cover the absolute minimum
>> needed to be able to navigate through the rest of the manual.
>
> info.info is obviously written to benefit users of both Emacs info and
> stand-alone info. It seems weird to me to delete it from Texinfo just
> for the sake of a distribution packing issue that
>
> i) doesn't occur on Debian-based systems
> (http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#30)
>
> ii) was solved two-years ago on RedHat-based systems in the rpm
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=927996#c11
>
> If I were packaging Emacs for a distribution (let me randomly say SUSE),
> I'd resolve this issue in the packaging step. But I'm just repeating
> myself (http://debbugs.gnu.org/14064#33). Obviously it's your decision.
Not everyone installs programs via middlemen distributors all the
time. They may download and install a release tarball directly.
Evidently it's a problem for some people, sometimes. For example, you
might install a Texinfo release with an older version of info.info
included and overwrite an up-to-date version that came with the
version of Emacs you're using.
Information forwarded
to
bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org:
bug#13965; Package
emacs.
(Sun, 18 Oct 2015 19:45:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #81 received at 13965 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
PPS Personally speaking, if I were packaging Emacs for a distribution,
I'd remove info.info from the installed files, and (probably) make the
Emacs package depend on the (in comparison tiny) Info package that provides it.
(It seems to be basically an essential package anyway, on Red Hat at least).
bug archived.
Request was from
Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org>
to
internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
(Mon, 16 Nov 2015 12:24:04 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 9 years and 219 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.