On Lu, 10 nov 14, 21:49:30, songbird wrote:
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 03 nov 14, 13:56:36, Alexis wrote:
zsh, however, is more helpful:
$ which umask
umask: shell built-in command
Maybe a (wishlist) bug against debianutils is in order?
is zsh providing a different version of
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
songbird wrote:
are you suggesting which be altered or the
manual page be amended to include more information
about what to do when which fails to report any
matching command?
I'd rather see which(1) be more informative about built-ins.
there's a lot of room for
While I like the dhelp script idea, I think man is a pure UX issue -
man should generally DWIM because if I type man foo, I don't want to
jump through hoops. There times (looking at libraries and system calls
and the like) that knowing the system helps. However, with 20 (IDR
how many - a bunch)
Andrei POPESCU wrote:
On Lu, 03 nov 14, 13:56:36, Alexis wrote:
=20
Iain M Conochie writes:
=20
However:
=20
$: which umask
$:
=20
So umask is _not_ a program (in the sense that there is no binary
called umask on the system)
=20
zsh, however, is more helpful:
=20
$ which umask
Le 03.11.2014 04:30, Joe Pfeiffer a écrit :
Carl Fink c...@finknetwork.com writes:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the
man
page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it
seemed
to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is
On 02/11/14 16:58, Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 14:17 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
That is not a solution to the original question I asked,
My apologies,
your question(s?) were unclear and obfuscated with false
assertions.
Hopefully a
On 03/11/14 13:56, Alexis wrote:
Iain M Conochie writes:
However:
$: which umask
$:
So umask is _not_ a program (in the sense that there is no binary
called umask on the system)
zsh, however, is more helpful:
$ which umask
umask: shell built-in command
BASH as current shell
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 10:38:40AM +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
My apologies,
your question(s?) were unclear and obfuscated with false
assertions.
Hopefully a beginner would start at the start, i.e.:-
help help
info info
man man
So you've never met a beginner and forgotten
Hi
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 01:56:36PM +1100, Alexis wrote:
Iain M Conochie writes:
However:
$: which umask
$:
So umask is _not_ a program (in the sense that there is no binary
called umask on the system)
zsh, however, is more helpful:
$ which umask
umask: shell
Karl E. Jorgensen writes:
Well, it *appears* that zsh is more helpful. But only because the
which command itself is a built-in for zsh :-) (it isn't for bash)
So you have the opposite problem: man which gives you the wrong
manual page :-) (but presumably very similar)
Indeed you're
On Lu, 03 nov 14, 13:56:36, Alexis wrote:
Iain M Conochie writes:
However:
$: which umask
$:
So umask is _not_ a program (in the sense that there is no binary
called umask on the system)
zsh, however, is more helpful:
$ which umask
umask: shell built-in command
Maybe a
2014/11/02 11:19 Carl Fink c...@finknetwork.com:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the man
page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it seemed
to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is darn confusing for a new user. I
On 2014-11-02 04:06 +0100, The Wanderer wrote:
On 11/01/2014 at 10:18 PM, Carl Fink wrote:
Surely a symbolic link could be set up for umask as well as the
others (bg, eval, fg, read, etc.)?
One could, but I don't think I'd say it would be a good idea, and
although the Debian bash
On 11/02/2014 at 03:23 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/11/02 11:19 Carl Fink c...@finknetwork.com:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got
the man page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C
programmer, but it seemed to be for C header files and came from
section
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 9:35 PM, The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On 11/02/2014 at 03:23 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
2014/11/02 11:19 Carl Fink c...@finknetwork.com:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got
the man page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C
On 11/02/2014 at 10:12 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 9:35 PM, The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm
wrote:
On 11/02/2014 at 03:23 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
Hmm. What do I get when I try to do a man umask?
BASH_BUILTINS (1)
I wonder why. I have a memory of doing something like
On 02/11/14 05:58, Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 14:17 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
That is not a solution to the original question I asked, unless you
alias it to man umask. You don't _type_ pam_umask.
Carl
Perhaps apropos is your friend here?
:$ apropos
On 11/02/2014 at 10:51 AM, Iain M Conochie wrote:
On 02/11/14 05:58, Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 14:17 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
That is not a solution to the original question I asked, unless
you alias it to man umask. You don't _type_
Joel Rees writes:
I think there was an OS back way back when, that had a learn
command. (As in, I want to `learn' about topic /.) Don't remember
which, though. Or it might have been an app.
UNIX: http://itservices.usc.edu/unix/commands/learn/
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 03:51:25PM +, Iain M Conochie wrote:
On 02/11/14 05:58, Carl Fink wrote:
On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 14:17 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
That is not a solution to the original question I asked, unless you
alias it to man umask. You don't
snip
Perhaps apropos is your friend here?
:$ apropos umask
pam_umask (8)- PAM module to set the file mode creation mask
As I said in the original, I found it almost immediately.
However, doesn't the Debian policy manual require a man page for every
program?
Not being a DD or DM I
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 12:26 AM, The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On 11/02/2014 at 10:12 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
[...]
Seems to be done, not by symlink, but in the man db.
What leads you to that conclusion?
AFAIK, if 'man xyz' brings up a man page from section 1, then there is
an
Iain M Conochie writes:
However:
$: which umask
$:
So umask is _not_ a program (in the sense that there is no binary
called umask on the system)
zsh, however, is more helpful:
$ which umask
umask: shell built-in command
Alexis.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On 11/02/2014 at 09:44 PM, Joel Rees wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 12:26 AM, The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm
wrote:
On 11/02/2014 at 10:12 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
Seems to be done, not by symlink, but in the man db.
What leads you to that conclusion?
AFAIK, if 'man xyz' brings up a
Carl Fink c...@finknetwork.com writes:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the man
page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it seemed
to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is darn confusing for a new user. I have been
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 11:57 AM, The Wanderer wande...@fastmail.fm wrote:
[...]
You might be able to find something out from 'man -d umask', and
examining the resulting debugging output... it seems to indicate exactly
what file it ends up using, and what path it takes in figuring out what
Joe Pfeiffer writes:
The underlying problem is that umask isn't a standalone command, it's a
shell builtin. So if you look at the bash manpage you can find the
(very terse) documention; of course, there's no hint anywhere that you
should do that. Just as for (looking at some other
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the man
page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it seemed
to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is darn confusing for a new user. I have been around long enough
(slink) that I quickly
An addition to the See Also section of the umask man page would
suffice.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
On Sat, Nov 01, 2014 at 09:27:39PM -0500, John Hasler wrote:
An addition to the See Also section of the umask man page would
suffice.
It isn't a general solution, though. Commands like fg just don't have man
pages. The symlink idea actually served to help (and educate) the new user.
--
Carl
Dear Carl Fink,
my unpleasant experience so far is that our package maintainers are keener
on keeping their bug closing rate appear very fast in the statistical
competition than in understanding and catering to your visions of
user-friendlines. Unless you mind disappointments try that path also.
On 11/01/2014 at 10:18 PM, Carl Fink wrote:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the
man page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but
it seemed to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is darn confusing for a new user. I have
On 02/11/14 13:18, Carl Fink wrote:
When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the man
page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it seemed
to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
This is darn confusing for a new user.
Agreed (also
On 02/11/14 13:27, John Hasler wrote:
An addition to the See Also section of the umask man page would
suffice.
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
Kind regards
--
Turns out you can't back a winner in the Gish Gallop ~ disappointed punter
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
On Sun, 2014-11-02 at 14:17 +1100, Scott Ferguson wrote:
Succinct!
man pam_umask?
That is not a solution to the original question I asked, unless you
alias it to man umask. You don't _type_ pam_umask.
Carl
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of
35 matches
Mail list logo
