[PATCH] DocBook XML toolchain modernization

Christopher Faylor cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com
Wed May 1 00:31:00 GMT 2013

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 03:53:58PM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
>On 4/30/2013 14:27, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 02:09:52PM -0600, Warren Young wrote:
>>>   Embedding <html> within <html> is eeevil.
>> faq.html is a pretty simple file and it seems to work.  Are there any
>> non-religious advantages to doing this?
>Conceivably browsers could stop tolerating it.

Yeah, that's what I thought you'd say.  I don't think it's worth the
effort and expense of duplicating Cygwin's CSS elsewhere but maybe
there's a clever way to avoid the html nesting which wouldn't require

>>> - Any comments about the other items in my FUTURE WORK section?
>>> Unconditional green light, or do you want to approve them one by one?
>> You have the right to change anything in the doc directory.  Anything
>> outside of that will require approval.
>The final removal of doctool requires replacing the DOCTOOL/SGML 
>comments in winsup/cygwin/{path,pinfo}.cc with Doxygen comments, and 
>folding most of the contents of winsup/cygwin/*.sgml into Doxygen 
>comments within the relevant source files.

I'd rather just move this out of the code entirely.  The user visible
interfaces aren't going to change and we haven't made a habit of
adding new DOCTOOL tags.  I don't know who first thought that adding
these was a good idea (it may predate my time on the project even
though CVS insists that I added it with version 1.1) but, if Corinna
agrees when she gets back, I'd like to just get rid of these.


More information about the Cygwin-patches mailing list