You are expecting that the CSS large/small/x-small/etc match those of
TeX.
No, that is not the expectation. (It would be impossible, anyway. All
these things are dynamically changeable in TeX.)
The expectation is that firefox not reduce the size used when
font-size:smaller is
In the printed manual, is pre class=smallexample/pre text
smaller or the same size as code/code text?
The result of @smallexample is smaller than the result of @example in
printed manuals.
Definitely each user can change the default browser settings, but I
would hope pages would
Does @smallexample come out as 8pt or so? It definitely looks
smaller than 10pt on my screen.
It comes out as whatever your browser tells it to, hopefully depending
on what font size you have set. This is why different users see
different things. The effect should be similar to using
I noticed that in the default Firefox3 configuration on my 1280x1024
display
your code samples on this page are tiny, and v.hard to read:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Inline.html
I'd like to hear from other people about whether the examples are too
small in their
The question is merely whether wrapv should be the default
with optimization levels -O0 through -O2.
Perhaps the question of where wrapv gets enabled, together with the
middle ground approach mentioned by Robert Dewar, could be put to the
GCC Steering Committee. (As was already proposed
Please submit a patch against SVN trunk to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
ChangeLog entries
I regret that I cannot spend more time on this than I already have. If
you don't want to use my diffs, then please just consider it as a bug
report. If you don't want to do that either, then I guess the
rms asked me to try systematize the Texinfo dir categories to match the
Free Software Directory where possible. So I hope you will be ok
with changing the gcc manuals to say
@dircategory Software development
instead of
@dircategory Programming
(and Software libraries instead of GNU libraries for
Maybe there is something funny about your environment, like an
auto-mounted NFS src directory which got auto-unmounted during the build?
No, it's all local.
However ... it must have been some craziness left over from a previous
build, even though I did make distclean in srcdir and
With gcc-4.0.0 on GNU/Linux (specifically, Red Hat WS 4), GNU make 3.80,
I get an error when trying to build with srcdir = objdir. Since the
documentation says this should work, even though it recommends
compiling with srcdir != objdir, I'm reporting it. (The problem does
not happen when srcdir
Greetings,
In gcc-4.0.0 (and all previous releases), the C++ shared libraries (for
example) are not found without adding specific link flags. For example,
compiling a C++ hello,world (source below, not that it matters):
$ which g++
g++ is /usr/local/gnu/bin/g++
$ g++ hello.cc
$ ldd a.out
Hi Gerald,
pemYou should substitute `samp/emspan class=sampi686/span
em/samp' in the above command with the appropriate processor
for your host./em
Thanks for the report, I'll work on fixing that.
karl
Now I now (and understand) that you changed the mangling of filenames,
but where does the g_t come from, and why?
Catering to XHTML's stupidity. I mentioned it in:
http://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#HTML-Xref-Link-Basics
viz.
One exception: the algorithm
12 matches
Mail list logo
