Article View: gnu.misc.discuss
Article #72166Re: How will man pages be stored under GNU?
From: Derek Upham
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1992 20:51
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 1992 20:51
49 lines
3246 bytes
3246 bytes
To quote a source at Cygnus: "take a look at the emacs, make, and gcc manuals. Tell me where the information on command line options is." Info files and man pages are two different beasties. Info files are geared towards organizing large texts, such as the Emacs manual or (especially) the Elisp manual. They're set up for browsing through a wide variety of topics. Man pages are designed for fast access to a small set of facts on a subject: the command-line parameters for Gopher or the calling conventions for strcat(3). Ideally, the information should fit on a handful of screen pages. Note that, in all the old Unix docs, information that didn't fit into a man page got put in their own files; this is where we get most of the text for BSD4.3's PS1, PS2, and SMM books. gumby@Cygnus.COM (David V. Wallace) writes: > 5 - info is supreme cause it's structured; man pages are hard to > search. So why is it I can never, ever find the section on "$^" variables in GNU Make without spending five minutes searching for it? And is there a difference between searching for a function name with your pager, and running the Info-search command for that name because you have no idea where the description is kept? Interestingly enough, the GNU Binutils have Info-ized "ar", "nm", "strip", etc., documentation. This was done by creating the TeXinfo equivalent of nroff man pages, then gathering them all underneath a "binutils" info node---an approach that loses the fast lookup of man pages, and that doesn't benefit from the organizational capabilities of Info. (Quickly: is "cp" in shellutils or fileutils?) One good point about it, though: this way it'll be easy to extract the relevant sections and put them in their own TeXinfo man pages. Which brings up another point: "nroff", "troff", and "*roff" don't have a bloody thing to do with the man pages/Info argument. They're just an arbitrary page layout format. There is no reason why someone couldn't upgrade TeXinfo to do just what nroff does. Condemning man pages because they're written in nroff is like tossing a missive because you don't like the looks of the messenger. Derek -- Derek Lynn Upham University of Washington sand@u.washington.edu University Computing Services Operations ============================================================================= "Ha! Your Leaping Tiger Kung Fu is no match for my Frightened Piglet Style!"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<sand.703716713@milton>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!news.u.washington.edu!milton!sandReferences:
<MIB.92Apr15092642@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <kuvh14INN8rb@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> <GUMBY.92Apr19114911@Cygnus.COM>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,5ecdebf098e029e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-04-19 13:51:53 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!usenet.coe.montana.edu!news.u.washington.edu!milton!sand From: sand@milton.u.washington.edu (Derek Upham) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: How will man pages be stored under GNU? Message-ID: <sand.703716713@milton> Date: 19 Apr 92 20:51:53 GMT References: <MIB.92Apr15092642@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> <kuvh14INN8rb@appserv.Eng.Sun.COM> <GUMBY.92Apr19114911@Cygnus.COM> Sender: news@u.washington.edu (USENET News System) Organization: University of Washington Lines: 49