On Wednesday 28 January 2009 05:02:37 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > i mean something simple like this (and the output from gnulib-tool still
> > looks sane to me):
> > --- a/modules/memcpy
> > +++ b/modules/memcpy
> > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Status:
> > obsolete
> >
> > Notice:
> > -Thi
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> i mean something simple like this (and the output from gnulib-tool still
> looks
> sane to me):
> --- a/modules/memcpy
> +++ b/modules/memcpy
> @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Status:
> obsolete
>
> Notice:
> -This module is obsolete.
> +This module is obsolete (see gnulib.info::Obsole
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 18:11:33 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > any reason for not adding a note when
> > warning about obsolete stuff ? rather than updating every module that is
> > marked obsolete, the gnulib tool itself could include the pointer.
>
> Hmm. Neither of these tw
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> any reason for not adding a note when
> warning about obsolete stuff ? rather than updating every module that is
> marked obsolete, the gnulib tool itself could include the pointer.
Hmm. Neither of these two options looks really good: A larger notice in every
modules fil
On Saturday 24 January 2009 10:44:22 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > What extra information would you find useful here?
> >
> > the simple explanation you posted in your e-mail should be in the
> > documentation. and the modules file should point people to that section
> > of the
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > What extra information would you find useful here?
>
> the simple explanation you posted in your e-mail should be in the
> documentation. and the modules file should point people to that section of
> the documentation so that it shows up in the warning when they run th
On Saturday 17 January 2009 15:24:36 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote on 2009-01-04:
> > a bunch of modules were labeled as obsolete recently, but no information
> > was included explaining why.
>
> They were marked obsolete because the problems that they fix don't occur
> any more on the
Mike Frysinger wrote on 2009-01-04:
> a bunch of modules were labeled as obsolete recently, but no information was
> included explaining why.
They were marked obsolete because the problems that they fix don't occur any
more on the platform that are reasonable porting targets now. In other words,
a bunch of modules were labeled as obsolete recently, but no information was
included explaining why. perhaps the toplevel NEWS should be updated, as well
as the "Notice" section of each module pointing people to the place for more
information and/or just telling them why right there ...
as it
