Hi Luke, Luke A. Call wrote on Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 01:36:49PM -0600: > On 04-01 12:47, Chris Bennett wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 07:01:15AM -0600, Diana Eichert wrote:
>>> have you considered looking at native OpenBSD tools? >>> https://man.openbsd.org/egre.4 >> Wow! I had no idea about this. > I think you know more about obsd than I do, but in case it's useful to > anyone else: > > I didn't know about egre(4) either, but I am trying to go > gradually thru the process of seeing "what is there" by browsing to > man.openbsd.org, putting a single period (".") in the search field, > choose a section, click apropos, and methodically reading. As jmc@ made me aware recently, an equal sign (or even better: Nm=) is faster than a period because it doesn't need to evaluate a regular expression for each and every manual page in the database. ;-) By the way, you can do that from the command line, too, no need to access the Internet: $ man -s 2 -ak Nm= then type :tNAME and hit the "enter" key. If you aleady know about the stuff shown at the top of the screen, just hit the t key once, or as many times as the top of the screen seems familiar. Even if you decide to study something and move around with arrows up and down and search with the "/" and "?" keys, hitting the "t" key again later will get you to next manual page from the place that you last jumped to with "t". If you get very confused as to where you stopped and whether you maybe skipped anything, hit "T" (= Shift-t) until you see something familiar, then move forward again with "t" as before. The "man -s 2 -ak Nm=" feature has been working for a long time, for multiple -stable releases, but for the ":tNAME" and "t" sugar, you nead a *really* current -current, as in, from a few minutes ago, or tomorrow's (amd64) snapshots, or later for slower architectures. Enjoy, Ingo > Lots of good > stuff and some surprises (for me at least) in there. If I hadn't > done that once with debian (years ago), I wouldn't know about touch(1), > for example, and a bunch of other things. > > Again, you know more than I, so no insult intended. :)
