[elpa] externals/relint 98bbb44 4/8: Documentation updates

[Mattias Engdegård]

branch: externals/relint
commit 98bbb445acc2f64ffa1e38e8e3e75b4ed04491f6
Author: Mattias Engdegård <address@hidden>
Commit: Mattias Engdegård <address@hidden>

    Documentation updates
    
    Update README.org and the package description in relint.el to account
    for that installation is now made from ELPA.
---
 README.org |  8 ++++++--
 relint.el  | 14 ++++++++++----
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/README.org b/README.org
index 2ce02db..9af54d7 100644
--- a/README.org
+++ b/README.org
@@ -20,12 +20,16 @@ From batch mode:
 : emacs -batch -l relint.el -f relint-batch FILES-AND-DIRS...
 
 where directories are scanned recursively.
+(Options for finding relint and xr need to be added after
+~-batch~, either ~-f package-initialize~ or ~-L DIR~.)
+
+In the ~*relint*~ buffer, pressing "g" will re-run the same check.
 
 * Installation
 
-Download the source file =relint.el= and set ~load-path~:
+From [[https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/relint.html][GNU ELPA]]:
 
-: (add-to-list 'load-path "RELINT-DIRECTORY")
+: M-x package-install RET relint RET
 
 Relint requires the package [[https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/xr.html][xr]]; 
install it from GNU ELPA.
 
diff --git a/relint.el b/relint.el
index 7f7e5c2..04081ca 100644
--- a/relint.el
+++ b/relint.el
@@ -39,11 +39,17 @@
 ;;
 ;;   emacs -batch -l relint.el -f relint-batch FILES-AND-DIRS...
 ;;
-;; Since there is no sure way to know whether a particular string is a
-;; regexp, the code has to guess a lot, and will likely miss quite a
-;; few. It tries to minimise the amount of false positives.
+;;   where options for finding relint and xr need to be added after
+;;   `-batch', either `-f package-initialize' or `-L DIR'.
 ;;
-;; In other words, it is a nothing but a hack.
+;; In the `*relint*' buffer, pressing "g" will re-run the same check.
+;;
+;; Bugs:
+;;
+;;   Since there is no sure way to know whether a particular string is a
+;;   regexp, the code has to guess a lot, and will likely miss quite a
+;;   few. It tries to minimise the amount of false positives.
+;;   In other words, it is a nothing but a hack.
 
 ;;; Code: