This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?

To: obrien at FreeBSD dot org
Subject: Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
From: Philip Blundell <philb at gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 19:42:11 +0100
Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, hjl at lucon dot org, binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <20010616093504.B2742@lucon.org> <m3ae371mas.fsf@north-pole.nickc.cambridge.redhat.com> <20010617120315.A2587@lucon.org> <20010625111426.A99064@dragon.nuxi.com> <200106251929.f5PJTEO11359@bobsleigh.nickc.cambridge.redhat.com> <20010625115335.A225@dragon.nuxi.com> <obrien@FreeBSD.org> <E15EbqX-0003RT-00@kings-cross.london.uk.eu.org> <20010626110626.A14623@dragon.nuxi.com>

>I just noticed that objcopy.1 in 2.11.[12] is the POD generated version.
>Can we agree to not commit the POD versions to the 2.11 branch?

Absolutely.

p.

PGP signature

References:
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: David O'Brien
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: Nick Clifton
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: David O'Brien
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: Philip Blundell
- Re: Should we remove those man pages from CVS?
  - From: David O'Brien

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]