> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 18:55:50 -0500
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry)
> Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, bug-texinfo@gnu.org
>
> eliz> I only saw [non-hierarchy] in one manual
>
> What was the manual?
info.texi, of course.
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 06:55:50PM -0500, Karl Berry wrote:
> removing the prev/next/up pointers from all other chapters and
> top-level nodes in the findutils manual
>
> Just to chime, I too say to remove 'em, from findutils and everywhere
> else. Down with node pointers!
>
> eliz>
removing the prev/next/up pointers from all other chapters and
top-level nodes in the findutils manual
Just to chime, I too say to remove 'em, from findutils and everywhere
else. Down with node pointers!
eliz> I only saw [non-hierarchy] in one manual
What was the manual?
Happy edit
> From: Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:19:25 -0700
> Cc: bug-gnulib , bug-texinfo@gnu.org
>
> I agree with Eric: the most elegant way is to do what almost every
> other GNU package has done, namely, to remove those redundant pointers
> from the .texi file.
Agreed. In
"James Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My guess is that I could work around this problem by removing the
> prev/next/up pointers from all other chapters and top-level nodes in
> the findutils manual. That seems a bit extreme though. Is there a
> more elegant way to solve this problem?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to James Youngman on 4/9/2007 5:33 AM:
>
> My guess is that I could work around this problem by removing the
> prev/next/up pointers from all other chapters and top-level nodes in
> the findutils manual. That seems a bit extreme though.
B
Hello all,
GNU findutils currently uses the full @node command for speficying the
navigational structure of the Findutils manual. So it contains @node
commands like this:-
@menu
* Introduction::Summary of the tasks this manual describes.
* Finding Files:: Finding
