On Tue, 2003-09-23 at 14:42, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > I don't see how that's relevant. OK, the man page is wrong, does the
> > existence of an info page somehow change this?
> >
> > Last I checked, the entire world (or, more importantly, the OSS
> > community) hadn't decided on info as a standard. And man seems to be the
> > defacto standard. And the problem info circumvented (no OSS roff tools)
> > is solved.
> 
> I'm not defending GNU, but you cannot say that GNU are not part of the OSS
> community and GNU abandoned man along time ago, so the people who maintain
> the utils don't mantain the docs...

I guess what I'm trying to say is that changes or improvements should
generally be `backward compatible'. If GNU expect people to embrace
info, they should make this as painless as possible. This means keeping
the same behavior as existing systems. 

`man foo' should return something useful to the syntax and parameters of
foo. It should be accurate, and not involve any additional pain (i.e.,
`see the info page' isn't an appropriate response, since I already told
it what I was looking for, it should show me regardless of format, at
least until info becomes more popular).

Mike 

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to