[PATCH 2/8] Simplify @node use in BFD documentation

[Jan Beulich]

On 08.02.2023 08:17, Tom Tromey wrote:
> The BFD docs currently specify all the parameters to @node.  However,
> this results in bad navigation in certain nodes -- the "space" command
> in info doesn't know how to find the next node.
> 
> I think this style of @node is a leftover from ancient times.
> Makeinfo can figure out the node structure on its own now, so simplify
> everything to a single-argument @node.
> 
> 2023-02-07  Tom Tromey  <tom@tromey.com>
> 
> 	* doc/webassembly.texi (File layout): Remove second argument from
> 	@node.
> 	* doc/bfd.texi: Use single-argument @node everywhere.
> ---
>  bfd/ChangeLog            |  6 +++++
>  bfd/doc/bfd.texi         | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>  bfd/doc/webassembly.texi |  2 +-
>  3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)

Does this change need to be accompanied by an update to configure, to
build BFD doc only with new enough makeinfo? This is what I get with
4.12 (admittedly old, but apparently deemed acceptable right now):

.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:245: Node `Sections' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:248: Node `Symbols' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:251: Node `Archives' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:254: Node `Formats' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:257: Node `Relocations' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:260: Node `Core Files' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:263: Node `Targets' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:266: Node `Architectures' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:269: Node `Opening and Closing' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:272: Node `Internal' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:275: Node `File Caching' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:278: Node `Linker Functions' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:281: Node `Hash Tables' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @top).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:300: Node `aout' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:303: Node `coff' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:306: Node `elf' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:311: Node `mmo' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:314: Node `GNU Free Documentation License' requires a sectioning command (e.g., @unnumberedsubsubsec).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:317: `BFD Index' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:314: `GNU Free Documentation License' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:311: `mmo' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:306: `elf' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:303: `coff' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:300: `aout' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:296: Next field of node `What to Put Where' not pointed to (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:300: This node (aout) has the bad Prev.
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:284: `BFD back ends' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:281: `Hash Tables' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:278: `Linker Functions' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:275: `File Caching' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:272: `Internal' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:269: `Opening and Closing' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:266: `Architectures' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:263: `Targets' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:260: `Core Files' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:257: `Relocations' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:254: `Formats' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:251: `Archives' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:248: `Symbols' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:245: `Sections' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:222: Next field of node `Memory Usage' not pointed to (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:245: This node (Sections) has the bad Prev.
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:195: `BFD front end' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:91: `Overview' has no Up field (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:78: Next field of node `Top' not pointed to (perhaps incorrect sectioning?).
.../bfd/doc/bfd.texi:91: This node (Overview) has the bad Prev.

I have no insight yet what else in the series may cause further issues.

Jan