I.e., don't forget gfdl.texi. Is that the intention?
Yes. I checked in new versions of all the Texinfo licenses to gnulib:
fdl.texi gpl-2.0.texi gpl-3.0.texi lgpl-2.1.texi lgpl-3.0.texi.
Let me know if problems ...
Best,
k
Hi Paul,
> If this sort of bootstrap were changed to make copies rather than
> symbolic links, it would be much more of a pain to develop when
> changes to both gnulib and an application are being debugged. It
> would be far too easy to mistakenly edit the coreutils copy of a
> gnulib file rather
Bruno Haible schrieb:
Clemens Koller wrote:
m4-1.4.10 doesn't build anymore (1.4.9 built fine):
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/ports/core/m4/work/src/m4-1.4.10/
src'
gcc -std=gnu99 -O2 -pipe -o m4 m4.o builtin.o debug.o eval.o
format.o freeze.o input.o macro.o output.o path.o symtab.o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes:
> rms suggested simply removing the @node and any sectioning command
> at all from the beginning of the Texinfo versions of the licenses. That
> way manuals can do whatever they want.
>
> Sounded sensible to me, so barring objections, I'll make those changes
Gary V. Vaughan schrieb:
Thanks for the bug report. I'm forwarding to the bug-m4 mailing list for
wider visibility.
Thanks.
This looks like a corner case for one of the files from gnulib that m4
imports during bootstrap: I'm forwarding to the bug-gnulib mailing list
too, so the author of th
