Graham Percival wrote Thursday, August 06, 2009 10:06 AM
On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 09:50:56AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I've just pushed another fix for broken refs resulting from your
doc
reorganisation.
Oops, I forgot that I need to "touch foo.tely" before testing.
That said, it would only find the broken @ref, not the broken
@rprogram stuff.
Aah, I should have checked more carefully. The
@rprogram broken link was caused by your dropping
the capital L & P from LilyPond-book in the node
name. I've just pushed the correct fix for this.
As there seems to be no replacement nodes all I can do
is comment them out with a FIXME. Any chance you could add
replacement
nodes as you go so we can fix the links properly rather than
scattering
FIXMEs throughout the docs?
Not until we have @rweb or @rgeneral or whatever it gets called.
At least, that's what the @ref{Setup for MacOS X} are waiting for.
I admit that I could fix the @rprogram{LilyPond-book} link right
now if it was a priority.
No, not a priority. They're all listed in a
couple of commits so far, so can be traced
without too much trouble.
One possible idea would be to add your ref-checking script to the
source tree, so that I could find and comment out these sections
myself... but IIRC, John was going to add such reference-checking
to the build script itself.
It's a python program. I could send it to
you, but I didn't write it for general use
so I'm not too keen on adding it to the source
tree without some tidying up. There are a
few cludges to get round the lack of machine-
generated files in the docs. John's got
enough to do at the moment. I run it every
time I edit the docs, so I'm happy to continue
fixing broken links as they appear.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
