Re: A question for package maintainers still using TexInfo < 5

[rik]

On 04/23/2015 09:00 AM, address@hidden wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: A question for package maintainers still using TexInfo < 5
> From:
> "John W. Eaton" <address@hidden>
> Date:
> 04/23/2015 06:41 AM
> To:
> address@hidden
> CC:
> address@hidden
> List-Post:
> <mailto:address@hidden>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding:
> 7bit
> Precedence:
> list
> MIME-Version:
> 1.0
> References:
> <address@hidden>
<address@hidden>
> In-Reply-To:
> <address@hidden>
> Message-ID:
> <address@hidden>
> Content-Type:
> text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> Message:
> 1
> On 04/23/2015 06:22 AM, Michael Goffioul wrote:
>> The bad thing about texinfo-5 is the switch to Perl, which make it much
>> slower to load than texinfo-4. This has made running the test suite a
>> real pain, while most of the time is spent loading/running makeinfo
>> (that makes timing "make check" less relevant).
>
> Oh, *that* probably explains why I stopped seeing a significant
difference in performance with the atomic refcount change.
>
>  I remember that jwe told
>> me at last octconf that's the/one reason he sticked to texinfo-4. Maybe
>> he switched to texinfo-5 since then .
>
> I've switched because Texinfo 5 is what is in Debian testing now.  But
I'm still somewhat annoyed by how long it takes to create the info format
version of the Octave manual now.
>
> jwe
>

I'm still using Ubuntu 12.04 which is a long-term release and it uses
Texinfo 4.  Isn't this change a concern to anyone who might download the
package, not just package maintainers?

--Rik