For RTEMS, we switched from texinfo to Sphinx and the dependency on Python3 for Sphinx has caused a bit of hassle. Is this going to be an issue for GCC?
Also we rely on TexLive for PDF output and that's a bit of a pain to install. Tex was incorrectly packaged on some RHEL/CentOS versions. This ignores a couple of plugins we use that I don't expect GCC to use. It works great but the host dependencies are sometimes a pain. We've ended up writing host OS specific advice/howto's to address this. Any expectations on host pain versus the pretty painless texinfo? Thanks. --joel RTEMS On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 2:37 AM Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> wrote: > On 6/1/21 3:31 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Tue, 1 Jun 2021, Martin Liška wrote: > > > >> On 5/31/21 5:49 PM, Michael Matz wrote: > >>> Hello Martin, > >>> > >>> On Mon, 31 May 2021, Martin Liška wrote: > >>> > >>>> I've made quite some progress with the porting of the documentation > and > >>>> I would like to present it to the community now: > >>>> https://splichal.eu/scripts/sphinx/ > >>>> Note the documentation is automatically ([1]) generated from > texinfo with > >>>> a > >>>> GitHub workflow ([2]). > >>> > >>> One other thing I was recently thinking about, in the Spinx vs. texinfo > >>> discussion: locally available documentation browsable/searchable in > >>> terminal with info(1) (or equivalents). > >> > >> Yes, that's handy. > >> > >>> I think the above (i.e. generating .rst from the texinfo file) would > >>> immediately nullify all my worries. So, just to be extra sure: your > >>> proposal now is to generate the .rst files, and that .texinfo remains > >>> the maintained sources, right? > >> > >> No, .texinfo files will be gone. However, Sphinx can output to info > >> format: > >> > https://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/man/sphinx-build.html#cmdoption-sphinx-build-M > > > > I see, that's good to hear. > > > >> And I've just added the generated Info pages here: > >> https://splichal.eu/scripts/sphinx/ > > > > Okay, but there's something amiss, just compare a local gcc.info with > > that. The sphinx generated one seems to only contain command line > > options, but none of the other topics, in particular it seems to contain > > the "Invoking GCC" chapter (and only that) as top-level, and all other > > ones are missing (like "C implementation", "C++ implementation", "C > > extension", and so on). > > You are right, I reduced that to 'Invoking GCC', which is simply what 'man > gcc' > presents. However, I moved that back to the entire GCC manual what you can > see now in the info page. > > > > > Looking at gccint.info I also seem quite some confusion, it's unclear to > > me if content is missing or not. But e.g. the top-level structure has a > > different order (a less logical one, this one is btw. shared with the > > order of the HTML generated docu, so it's probably specific to sphinx > > setup or such). > > Yes, the organization was bad and I fixed that. Now it's much better. > > Martin > > > > > Ignoring that missing content what is there right now does seem somewhat > > acceptable for local use, though. > > > > > > Ciao, > > Michael. > > > >
