Ludovic Courtès (2016-03-17 11:52 +0300) wrote:
> Alex Kost <alez...@gmail.com> skribis:
>
>> Chris Marusich (2016-03-12 14:38 +0300) wrote:
>>
>>> From bf03c0a3fa35144342849cdf550219a185fbf10d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> From: Chris Marusich <cmmarus...@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 01:55:07 -0800
>>> Subject: [PATCH] doc: Clarify and consolidate modify-services documentation.
>>>
>>> * doc/guix.texi ("Using the Configuration System": Move the example...
>>> * doc/guix.texi ("Service Reference"): ...to here, and clarify more.
>>> * gnu/services.scm (modify-services): Update docstring to match.
>>
>> [...]
>>> -This is a shorthand for:
>>> +The @var{body} should evaluate to the new service parameters, which will
>>> +be used to configure the new service. This new service will replace the
>>> +original in the resulting list. Because a service's service parameters
>>> +are created using @code{define-record-type*}, you can write a succint
>>> +@var{body} that evaluates to the new service parameters by using the
>>> +@code{inherit} feature that @code{define-record-type*} provides.
>>> +
>>> +@xref{Using the Configuration System} for example usage.
>>
>> Now there is a compilation warning, as makeinfo doesn't like this line:
>>
>> ./doc/guix.texi:10138: warning: `.' or `,' must follow @xref
>
> Pushed the obvious fix, thanks.
>
> I guess most of us are using Texinfo 6.1 now and won’t notice.
Oh, I've never noticed that I use 6.0. It's because I update my
profiles using "guix package --manifest" facility and:
(@ (gnu packages texinfo) texinfo) gives Texinfo 6.0
Is there a reason why we keep so many versions of texinfo? In
particular why there is ‘texinfo-6.1’ variable, while ‘texinfo’ is still
6.0?
--
Alex
