Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chris Waters wrote:
> > Actually....checking...this seems to be true, and I don't think we
> > want it to be true. Every program that's found in the default path,
> > yes, but I was certainly under the impression that we don't want or
> > need man pages for what might be called "private binaries",
> > i.e. programs not intended to be run directly -- programs that should
> > usually be found in /usr/lib/whatsit.
> Well I don't know, policy paints all library function calls with the
> same brush:
True, but library functions are externally visible (at least if you're
a programmer), while private binaries generally aren't. It may seem a
little strange to argue that some binaries shouldn't have man pages
while lib functions should, but that's mostly because we've been so
lax about providing man pages for lib functions. I think. :-)
> The point seems to be, if it's something people would reasonably
> expect find a man page on, something should be done.
Yes, that seems reasonable. But I'm afraid it's ambiguous. The
question is, what *would* we reasonably expect to find man pages on?
Do private binaries fall into that category? I'd say not, but I'm
just one opinion....
cheers
--
Chris Waters [EMAIL PROTECTED] | I have a truly elegant proof of the
or [EMAIL PROTECTED] | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr | this .signature file.
