On Sun, 6 May 2007, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On 5/6/07, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> > > asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> > > collection of
On 5/6/07, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> collection of manpages* counted as the Work, so it was okay to put the
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GCC's manpages are mechanically generated from its info files. We
> asked the FSF how to apply the GFDL and were told that the *entire
> collection of manpages* counted as the Work, so it was okay to put the
> Invariant Sections in separate manpages. See
MJ Ray wote:
[The state of the GCC manpage] probably means that the GCC maintainers have
misused the FDL by accident, similar to the GDB maintainers in the past.
[...]
please research whether the GCC
maintainers know that using the FDL for a manpage has problems. Some GNU
projects use info fil
Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm rather confused. The GCC maintainers put the manpage in non-free
> along with the rest of the GCC docs. The manpage says at the bottom
> that it's covered by the GFDL and mentions invariant sections that
> aren't in the manpage. Huh? What does this
I'm rather confused. The GCC maintainers put the manpage in non-free
along with the rest of the GCC docs. The manpage says at the bottom
that it's covered by the GFDL and mentions invariant sections that
aren't in the manpage. Huh? What does this mean as far as the location
of the manpage and the
6 matches
Mail list logo
