> Maybe the better fix would be renaming all the nodes in coreutils.texi to
> comply with this convention?
I think the node names should stay as they are. The convention is
either "Invoking xxx" or "xxx invocation".
http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Manual-Structure-Details.html
I originally named the nodes in the coreutils manual (well, it was the
three *utils at the time) using the latter so that completion would work
better.
(Aside: a depressing number of GNU manuals don't follow either convention;
standalone info has a ton of special cases built into it. :()
As for the original report:
> | Emit "info coreutils 'PROG invocation'" into the man page,
> | rather than just "info PROG". The latter would often fail
> | or simply display the man page.
I suppose it is more reliable to say "info coreutils 'PROG invocation'",
although it seems a shame to replace a simple command with a more complex one.
What this report really says to me is that the dir file was not
correctly created by the Debian (or whatever) installation process. If
you actually install the coreutils manual in the normal way, you will
get dir file entries for all the programs, and "info PROG" will then
work fine.
karl
_______________________________________________
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
