On 04/09/2015 05:47 PM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Thank you Phillipe! I just committed the readings.html portion
of your patch which fixes the long standing broken link.
Apologies again for nobody picking up your fine patches
originally -- please do not hesitate to send more, I promise
we'll
Hi Philippe,
On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, Philippe Baril Lecavalier wrote:
Embarrassing typos, my apologies. I was told to specify that I don't
have commit access, but since this mention is irrelevant, I modified my
suggested notice in about.html to reflect that. See attached.
sorry for the delay,
Hi Tobias,
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Tobias Burnus wrote:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Loop_002dSpecific-Pragmas.html
However, some script changes the link to:
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Loop-Specific-Pragmas.html
which won't work. Try yourself at
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Below you'll find a patch for maintainer-scripts/update_web_docs_svn
which I tested on gcc.gnu.org and the current documentation pages (not
those for older releases) are adjusted now.
Among others this fixes the link you reported above (though adjusting
On Mon, 2 Dec 2013, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Looks good to me. (I fully concur that the _002d is ugly.)
Okay, so I applied this patch plus the one below to adjust
gcc-4.9/changes.html accordingly. (The first anchor there
is not stable, but for other reasons.)
Thanks for pushing for this fix!
Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
Okay, so I applied this patch plus the one below to adjust
gcc-4.9/changes.html accordingly. (The first anchor there
is not stable, but for other reasons.)
But it should be sufficient to check them before the release and then
one is fine as the links should refer to the
Working on it. I hope to have a patch within the next 48 hours.
Gerald
On October 25, 2013 22:32, Tobias Burnus wrote:
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Thanks for looking at the patch. However, the patch has a link
problem. The documentation is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Loop_002dSpecific-Pragmas.html
That's also the link I use in the changes.html file. However,
+li Secify code[docs]/code in the subject header./li
Also [wwwdocs] instead of [docs].
--
Patrick Marlier
Embarrassing typos, my apologies. I was told to specify that I don't
have commit access, but since this mention is irrelevant, I modified my
suggested notice in about.html to reflect that. See attached.Index: projects/beginner.html
Am 20.11.2013 16:45, schrieb Philippe Baril Lecavalier:
Embarrassing typos, my apologies. I was told to specify that I don't
have commit access, but since this mention is irrelevant, I modified
my suggested notice in about.html to reflect that. See attached.
Well, stating that one doesn't
Enclosed is a patch modifying three broken links, on three separate
pages. I also added some indications to about.html on how to submit a
patch for the web site for those who do not have commit access, which is
precisely what I have been instructed to do (so now it becomes
documented).
See
Am 20.11.2013 06:00, schrieb Philippe Baril Lecavalier:
+pIf you do not have commit access, please send an email to a
+href=mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org;gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org/a
+and CC a href=mailto:ger...@pfeifer.com;ger...@pfeifer.com/a,
+with the following:/p
+
+ul
+li Secify
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Thanks for looking at the patch. However, the patch has a link
problem. The documentation is at
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Loop_002dSpecific-Pragmas.html
That's also the link I use in the changes.html file. However, some
script changes the link to:
14 matches
Mail list logo
