From: Karl M. Hegbloom
Subject: Re: CLX manual... `%%Page: n m' gs comments solve the problem.
Date: 
Message-ID: <87afhnie5t.fsf@bittersweet.inetarena.com>
>>>>> "Cedric" == Cedric Adjih <·····@johan.inria.fr> writes:

>>>>> "Karl" == Karl M. Hegbloom <·······@inetarena.com> writes:

    Karl> I've begun to convert the CLX manual to GNU TeX-info
    Karl> form. [...]  Unless you've got the original sources to it...

    Karl> I'm using the CLX postscript files that come along with
    Karl> CMU-CL for Linux.  The pages in them are in back-to-front
    Karl> order, and there is no document-structuring, so `gv' cannot
    Karl> page backwards in them, making it a real pain to read.

    Cedric> Maybe adding the document-structuring header would work
    Cedric> (it works with some documents, so well that I once patched
    Cedric> ghostview to add an option a '--force-dsc', long ago).

 That would be a good thing to put back into Ghostscript!  You are
right, it works.  I put the header at the top, copied from another
document, comments around the prolog, and a `%%Page: n m' comment
before every ghostscript `bop' command, and now there's page numbers
showing up in `gv'.  Neato!

 This will save me a lot of work.  I'm going to write a quick `emacs
-q -batch' lisp function to add the comments and reverse the order of
the pages.  I'll send them back to the CMU-CL maintainers; or better,
will drop them in one of my Public WWW directories, along with that
emacs program.

 I will be able to build a Lectern (DEC SRC) file of it, drop it on my
Zip disk with the rest of the X Manuals, and read it from there. :-) 
I hope `-PSfakeOCR' works.

 It might still be worth the effort to re-create the CLX manual in
Texinfo markup.  Perhaps I will keep working on that.  Is anyone
interested in helping or just in having a copy of it?  (The Texas
Instruments copyright explicitly allows this.)

 Someone mentioned that GNU is no longer supporting Texinfo.  That
cannot be true, because they have just released a new version.
Another person said to go straight to HTML, rather than Texinfo.  I
don't think that's a good idea.  The Texinfo source form is much more
versitile---it could be turned into HTML by `texi2html'.


-- 
··············@inetarena.com (Karl M. Hegbloom)
http://www.inetarena.com/~karlheg
Portland, OR  USA
Debian GNU 1.3.1  Linux 2.0.30+parport AMD K5 PR-133