Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #72084Texinfo vs. LaTexinfo and info file org.
From: Dag H. Wanvik
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 1992 13:44
Date: Sat, 04 Apr 1992 13:44
22 lines
1516 bytes
1516 bytes
1. What is the official FSF stand on the relative merits of these two? It seems to me that texinfo is still going strong, and that latexinfo is in little use? 2. What is the most sensible organization of `info' directory files? We patched info.el to use a info-path rather thatn one directory so as to avoid mixing official Emacs info files with imported stuff (for easy upgrading to next Emacs version). This seems well enough integrated for lisp-libraries but hardly for info files ? Dag -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dag H. Wanvik , Senior Systems Engineer Mailing address: KVATRO AS, Pirsenteret, N-7005 Trondheim, NORWAY Telephone : +47 7 520090 Fax : +47 7 520140 Internet e-mail: wanvik@kvatro.no OR dag@kvatro.no ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<DAG.92Apr4154439@grim.kvatro.no>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru.mt.luth.se!lunic!sunic!ugle.unit.no!ugle.unit.no!dagShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,e6eb34989859f2f5,start X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-04-04 05:44:39 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru.mt.luth.se!lunic!sunic!ugle.unit.no!ugle.unit.no!dag From: dag@kvatro.no (Dag H. Wanvik) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Texinfo vs. LaTexinfo and info file org. Message-ID: <DAG.92Apr4154439@grim.kvatro.no> Date: 4 Apr 92 13:44:39 GMT Sender: news@ugle.unit.no (NetNews Administrator) Reply-To: dag@kvatro.no Organization: Kvatro A/S, Trondheim, Norway Lines: 22