-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 David Douthitt wrote: > Adam Lazur wrote: >> I agree, 2 sets of documentation sucks. > >> The crusty old unix guy inside my head is screaming "DROP THE TEXINFO, >> IT'S EVIL", but the gnu project probably disagrees ;) >> > I agree on both counts. I put the man page into my book, and printed a > version of the Info documentation. The info documentation is not > readable in printed form, in my opinion. Most of it seems to read like > a reference manual (here's the list of X in alphabetical form) rather > than a tutorial or introduction (here's how you do X).
David, from this I understand you to be saying that the manpage and the texinfo document have a difference in style; however, in comparing the two, I don't see this to be the case: the manpage appears to have all the very same "here's a list of X in alphabeitcal form" that the texinfo manual has; and the texinfo page has all of the tutorial-style texts that the manpage has. In fact, the content is so very similar that I have to wonder if the manpage was actually generated from the texinfo at some point; if that's the case, then I'd be very interested in knowing how this was done. - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer, and GNU Wget Project Maintainer. http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFId8AT7M8hyUobTrERAnrlAJ9xk/Xh0TnoZArDBGlUdIUvjSdMiwCfdzJ/ AC36yke1PLAN8DenxUpARCY= =KkCY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
