> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 19:02:39 +0200 > From: Vincent Belaïche <[email protected]> > CC: [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected] > > Eli Zaretskii a écrit : > >> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:05:55 +0000 > >> From: Vincent Belaïche <[email protected]> > >> > >> There must not be any CR in the Info files, only LF. > >> > > > > ?? Why? > > > > > > > Looping also through [email protected] for info. > > 1) install-info is unable to handle them --- at least the version of > install-info which I have. > > $ install-info --version > => install-info (GNU texinfo) 4.11
On what OS is that? > 2) So it seems that this is not a bug of install-info, see Texinfo > manual `(texinfo) Conventions' info node: > > * Separate paragraphs with one or more blank lines. Currently > Texinfo only recognizes newline characters as end of line, not the > CRLF sequence used on some systems; so a "blank line" means exactly > two consecutive newlines. Sometimes blank lines are useful or > convenient in other cases as well; you can use the '@noindent' to > inhibit paragraph indentation if required (*note @noindent::). This is simply misleading, and might be true only on Posix systems. It's definitely false on MS-Windows, where CRLF end-of-line format _must_ be supported, or else the port which doesn't is simply broken, because 'makeinfo' produces CRLF EOLs when it runs on MS-Windows. > My personal opinion is the following one: > * That anti-CRLF Texinfo way is completely non-sensical: Texinfo files > should be handled as text files, because any version control system will > be better at comparing version, and at compressing them together. So I > am in opinion that BBDB is not to blame (well they still could do > something for people on MSWindows and with older version of Texinfo do > not have any problems). > * So the Texinfo system should be completely CRLF-proof, be it with > makeinfo converting CRLF to LF, or with install-info handling properly > CRLF in detecting dir-category. > * The argument that CRLF is labelled as not supported in the doc is a > bit MSWindows-unfriendly (why?), this also means that all the people > writing documentation in Texinfo will have more problems in making this > doc available to Windows-victims. I cannot agree more. That is why I was surprised to read your requirement that no CRs be present.
