[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/ |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:30:43 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:25:55AM -0000, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Mark Polesky wrote Tuesday, March 02, 2010 1:18 AM
>
>> I just successfully compiled commit 715dc5e, which contains
>> the @ref being discussed.
Did that also regenerate the topdocs? If not, then you wouldn't
see the error Francisco reported.
> Following Francisco's "correction" my local check
> on reference validity now says
>
>> Warning: xref should be internal around line 231 in
>> included/compile.itexi
>> Warning: xref should be internal around line 761 in
>> included/compile.itexi
>
> so I think these two should be set back to straight @refs.
We'll need to update that checker to ignore such cases. Either
that, or we'll need to play games with
@ifset topdoc
to give those a @rcontrib, but otherwise use @ref.
The problem is that when compiling contributor.texi, texinfo
prefers (but does not require) a @ref. But when compiling
INSTALL.txt, texinfo requires a @rcontrib.
Cheers,
- Graham
- Problem in docs: ref in included/, Francisco Vila, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Graham Percival, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Francisco Vila, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Mark Polesky, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Francisco Vila, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Trevor Daniels, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Mark Polesky, 2010/03/01
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Trevor Daniels, 2010/03/02
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: Problem in docs: ref in included/, Trevor Daniels, 2010/03/02