Bug#536506: glibc-doc-reference: clutters up main info directory
On 2017-12-06 09:32, Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2013-07-10 21:32 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
>
> > On 2009-07-11 08:02 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >
> >> tags 536506 + patch
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> On 2009-07-11 02:06 +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >>
> >>> tag 536506 + help
> >>> thanks
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:56:01PM +0200, Sven Joachim wrote:
> >>>> Package: glibc-doc-reference
> >>>> Version: 2.9-1
> >>>> Severity: normal
> >>>>
> >>>> Your package puts an entry for every libc function and macro into the
> >>>> main info directory, using up more than 1700 lines. This has been
> >>>> triggered by the transition to GNU's install-info; apparently the dpkg
> >>>> implementation ignored secondary INFO-DIR-SECTION entries.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Could you have more details about what should be changed to fix that?
> >>
> >> There should not be a direntry for every function (upstream includes
> >> them on purpose, but this is a big abuse, that is what indices are
> >> for). The following minimal patch avoids this:
> >>
> >>--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> >> --- glibc-doc-reference-2.9.orig/manual/libc.texinfo
> >> +++ glibc-doc-reference-2.9/manual/libc.texinfo
> >> @@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
> >> @direntry
> >> * Libc: (libc). C library.
> >> @end direntry
> >> -@include dir-add.texi
> >>
> >> @c This tells texinfo.tex to use the real section titles in xrefs in
> >> @c place of the node name, when no section title is explicitly given.
> >>--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> >
> > Alas, this patch got lost in the 2.17-1 upload although it still
> > applies. Perhaps a patch system would have avoided this problem?
>
> There is now a patch system, but the patch for this bug (along with a
> few others which may or may not still be relevant) has not been applied
Most of the patches where tweak to the build system which has been
addressed in a different way, or files taken from the main repository,
which are now directly part of the tarball.
> when converting to the 3.0 (quilt) format. So I'm attaching it again.
I indeed missed the purpose for that one. Thanks, I'll apply it for the
next upload.
Aurelien
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 4096R/1DDD8C9B
aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Reply to: