Re: PATCH: tidy documentation of ld command-line option syntax

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>]

Sandra Loosemore wrote:

> It seems to me that, for options that are specific to
> a particular emulation mode, the syntax given in the docs should agree
> with the syntax for whatever linker ld is trying to emulate

  Yes, OK, that makes sense to me.

> These changes look OK to me from a purely document-formatting point of
> view, but did you check the implementation?

  Not thoroughly.  I only know for sure about the PE options (most of the
patch), which are implemented solely by adding options to the getopts()
parsing, and which are not attempting to emulate any MS linker.

> Anyway, I think we've reached convergence on the direction to take here,
> and what we've got so far is at least an incremental improvement over
> the existing text.  How about I commit my last patch, either with or
> without your further additions, and then we can make any further tweaks
> on top of that?  

  I don't have approval rights, but I'd recommend the maintainers go with your
second patch without my additional one; I'll pick out just the PE options and
respin my patch later.

> (Actually, when I started out, I would've been happy
> just with changing the documented syntax of -Map, since that's the one
> that seems to trip up people all the time....  this wasn't intended to
> turn into an overhaul of the entire manual....  :-P)

  Since documentation always gets neglected, I figure there's a duty on us to
do a little light maintenance whenever we happen to be in there anyway, rather
than just focusing on the paragraphs we're interested in and trying hard not
to see the decay and decrepitude all around us.... not a lot of point
installing double-glazing in a tumble-down ramshackle old cottage if the door
is hanging off its hinges!

    cheers,
      DaveK