Re: Strange apropos(1) behavior?

2019-04-19 Thread Abhinav Upadhyay
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 6:43 PM Abhinav Upadhyay wrote: > > I replied to Paul privately but posting it publicly here for others: > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 4:40 PM Paul Goyette wrote: > > > > On Fri, 19 Apr 2019, Paul Goyette wrote: > > > > > Should it be possible to use both the -l (legacy

Re: Strange apropos(1) behavior?

2019-04-19 Thread Abhinav Upadhyay
I replied to Paul privately but posting it publicly here for others: On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 4:40 PM Paul Goyette wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Apr 2019, Paul Goyette wrote: > > > Should it be possible to use both the -l (legacy mode) option and specify a > > specific section -[1-9] ? > > > > # apropos

Re: Strange apropos(1) behavior?

2019-04-19 Thread Joerg Sonnenberger
On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 07:09:51PM +0800, Paul Goyette wrote: > And while we're at it, the man page for apropos(1) says that the -p option > _defaults_ to using more(1) as the pager, implying that it should be > possible to use a different pager. Yet there is no option to tell apropos > to which

Re: Strange apropos(1) behavior?

2019-04-19 Thread Paul Goyette
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019, Paul Goyette wrote: Should it be possible to use both the -l (legacy mode) option and specify a specific section -[1-9] ? # apropos -l -8 specific apropos: no such table: mandb apropos: No relevant results obtained. Please make sure that you spelled all the terms

Strange apropos(1) behavior?

2019-04-19 Thread Paul Goyette
Should it be possible to use both the -l (legacy mode) option and specify a specific section -[1-9] ? # apropos -l -8 specific apropos: no such table: mandb apropos: No relevant results obtained. Please make sure that you spelled all the terms correctly or try using different keywords.