Re: GNU programs & texinfo docs vs. manpages [was: Re: linker paths & /usr/local/lib]
On 2003-02-24 21:28, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 09:48:08PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > GNU people do hate manpages annd avoid them some times :( > > Navigating info pages is like having teeth pulled without novocaine. Well, that's a bit of an exaggeration there, but I get your point. The whole problem with Texinfo is that it doesn't have a well defined, pretty much standard, well-known and respected layout for the presentation of information to you. The fact that you find it difficult to navigate .info documents is not a direct result of the format used to write the documentation, but a side-effect of the way things are organised in the original document. Most of the Texinfo documents I've read haven't been written to be read sequentially. Sometimes, there isn't a well-defined order of all the "nodes"; which only makes things worse. There are a few very good documents in Texinfo though. The open sourced book about CVS of http://cvsbook.red-bean.com is a very good example of a Texinfo document that I really, I mean REALLY, enjoyed reading. It's not the format. It's the writer... To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Re: GNU programs & texinfo docs vs. manpages [was: Re: linker paths & /usr/local/lib]
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 09:48:08PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2003-02-24 18:39, Sam Izzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Most of the GNU tools are better documented in the info pages, as > > > they consider man pages legacy. info ld might turn up more > > > detailed info. > > > > You know, I've read/heard that many times over the years, but > > whenever I look at the info page for whatever tool I'm after, it's > > exactly the same as the man page (in the ld case too). > > That's not always true. I personally committed the change in the > manual page of sdiff(1) both to -current and -stable, to make sure > that the incomplete, lacking manpage has minimal changes from the > vendor version but *does* point to the texinfo docs of diff/sdiff > which are more complete than the manpage. > > GNU people do hate manpages annd avoid them some times :( > Yes, the most aberrant product of GNU is "info". Praise be to info2html, which at least makes them usable. Navigating info pages is like having teeth pulled without novocaine. Long live manual pages..keep us Unix oldies happy :) -- Regards Cliff Sarginson The Netherlands [ This mail has been checked as virus-free ] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
GNU programs & texinfo docs vs. manpages [was: Re: linker paths & /usr/local/lib]
On 2003-02-24 18:39, Sam Izzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Most of the GNU tools are better documented in the info pages, as > > they consider man pages legacy. info ld might turn up more > > detailed info. > > You know, I've read/heard that many times over the years, but > whenever I look at the info page for whatever tool I'm after, it's > exactly the same as the man page (in the ld case too). That's not always true. I personally committed the change in the manual page of sdiff(1) both to -current and -stable, to make sure that the incomplete, lacking manpage has minimal changes from the vendor version but *does* point to the texinfo docs of diff/sdiff which are more complete than the manpage. GNU people do hate manpages annd avoid them some times :( To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
