Re: [doc] Avoid conflicts between gdb and cross-gdb.

[Pedro Alves <palves at redhat dot com>]

On 08/08/2014 07:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thu 07 Aug 2014 18:43:34 Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>>   (1) Should we support out of the box distinct targets to be installed
>>>       at the same prefix?
>>>   (2) Should the name of some of those files match the name of
>>>       the executable?
>>>
>>> For (1), I'm leaning towards a "not necessary", but we can perhaps
>>> find a middle ground. I don't know the various defaults to really
>>> help making a decision without spending some time to look at it.
>>> Either way, I have a fairly neutral opinion, so I am happy following
>>> the group.
>>>
>>> For (2), I thought that for the man page, and (to some degree, since
>>> I know little about info) the "info" page as well. But again,
>>> I don't really have much of opinion on that.
>>
>> But "info FOO" does not mean "show me the file FOO", it means "show me
>> the manual whose DIR entry is FOO".  (Although the stand-alone Info
>> reader falls back to the file interpretation if it doesn't find FOO in
>> the DIR menu.)
>>
>> And the Info system doesn't really support more than one manual for
>> the same tool anyway.
>>
>> So I think, unlike the man pages, the Info manual should not be
>> renamed.
> 
> yes, you'd actually have to rewrite the base node name so that instead of 
> identifying itself as "gdb" it'd be "${target}-gdb" (i.e. apply the program 
> transformation).  then doing `info sh4-linux-gnu-gdb` would give you the 
> correct man page.  this matches the man page behavior where you can do `man 
> sh4-linux-gnu-gdb` and such.

Eh, I always assumed this sort of thing is why we write @value{GDBN} all
over the manual, and that we were already transforming that, but indeed
seems like we aren't.

Thanks,
Pedro Alves