On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Andy Hall wrote: > Igor - > > I don't have /etc/postinstall/man.sh but I do have man.sh.done. After > looking at the latter, I simply ran it as you suggested. It seemed to do > just what was required without error. I will take your advice and check the > other postinstall scripts as well. The setup.log says it ran.
What you should be looking at is setup.log.full (if it's still valid) -- that's where the output of the scripts is stored. > BTW the way my mailer is OutLook (Look Out!) so I am not sure what you are > asking me to do in the way of display names. Are you recommending I use the > cygwin mailer for this stuff? Nope. See <http://www.google.com/search?q=outlook+PCYMTNQREAIYR>. > I am not sure it is totally the -r option in less. My memory fades quickly, > but I think the man -d was showing less -r when I was having the problem. Umm, it's right there in the message below... :-) And it shows "less -is". > All is well now. > > Andy Good. Igor > -----Original Message----- > From: Igor Pechtchanski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 8:32 AM > To: Andy Hall > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Upgraded man command > > Andy, > > Do you have both /etc/postinstall/man.sh and /etc/postinstall/man.sh.done? > If so, then the newer version of the postinstall script has not completed > properly. I'd run /etc/postinstall/man.sh and then rename it to > /etc/postinstall/man.sh.done. If the only thing you have is > /etc/postinstall/man.sh.done, then that's the script that you'll need to > re-run (don't worry about the timestamp, it doesn't have to be after the > install time). When you copied the default config file, you did part of > the job of that postinstall script (AFAICS, creating manpath.exe is the > other part, hence the question). > > What I'd be worried about if I were you is that none of the postinstall > scripts on that particular upgrade may have run properly. It might make > sense to see for all packages that you upgraded what the postinstall > scripts were supposed to do, and whether they did it. > > Two more points: first, <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>. And > second, a small correction to my statement below -- the "-Tascii" is not a > problem, it was the fact that "less" was missing the "-r" flag. > Igor > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Andy Hall wrote: > > > Perhaps not everything is as it should be.... > > > > 1. /bin/manpath.exe is missing > > 2. /etc/postinstall/man.sh.done is there but it was modified on a date > > preceding the date I upgraded. > > 3. No errors for man.sh in /var/logs/setup and it shows it was run. > > > > But.... I simply copied the man.conf.default to man.conf, ensured the > > options matched yours and it now works. Go figure. > > > > Thanks for the help. > > > > Andy > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Igor Pechtchanski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 1:22 PM > > To: Andy Hall > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Upgraded man command > > > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Andy Hall wrote: > > > > > Igor - > > > > > > Thanks for the reply. This is a complete mystery to me. See answers > > > to your questions below. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Igor Pechtchanski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 9:46 AM > > > To: Andy Hall > > > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>. Thanks. > > > > > Subject: Re: Upgraded man command > > > > > > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Andy Hall wrote: > > > > > > > > > I updated my cygwin system on my W2K SP4 systemto the latest > > > > > release of cygwin and the man command started to display man > > > > > pages as follows: > > > > > > > > > > ESC[1mNAMEESC[0m > > > > > ln - make links between files > > > > > > > > > > ESC[1mSYNOPSISESC[0m > > > > > ESC[1mln ESC[22m[ESC[4mOPTIONESC[24m]... ESC[4mTARGETESC[24m > > > > > [ESC[4mLINK_NAMEESC[24m] > > > > > ESC[1mln ESC[22m[ESC[4mOPTIONESC[24m]... ESC[4mTARGETESC[24m... > > > > > ESC[4mDIRECTORYESC[0m > > > > > ESC[1mln ESC[22m[ESC[4mOPTIONESC[24m]... > > > > > ESC[4m--target-directory=DIRECTORYESC[24m ESC[4mTARGETESC[24m... > > > > > > > > > > Interestingly, the man pages previously cached in /usr/man/cat1 > > > > > seem to format just fine. If I remove the cached version, I get > > > > > something akin to the above. > > > > > > > > > > I suspect this is some sort of setup problem, but I have been > > > > > unable to track it down. All involved commands seem to be > > > > > up-to-date. > > > > > > > > I see that neither of MANPAGER, PAGER, and LESS is set in your > > > > environment. > > > > > > Right. I use a pretty vanilla system for testing a fairly large > > > messaging system. I tend to stay away from environment variables if > > > I can. > > > > > > > Are you running straight "man", or is it aliased to > > > > something? > > > > > > Straight man. > > > > > > > Is your /usr/share/misc/man.conf different from > > > > /usr/share/misc/man.conf.default? > > > > > > There is no /usr/share/misc/man.conf. Do I need one? I should > > > think not. > > > > You do, actually. It was supposed to have been created by the "man" > > postinstall script. Since you don't have it, I assume the postinstall > > scripts didn't run correctly, and so you might have a misconfigured > > system. > > > > Check if you have a /bin/manpath.exe as a symlink to man.exe. Also check > > that you have a /etc/postinstall/man.sh.done (not /etc/postinstall/man.sh). > > If you happened to not run setup.exe after that upgrade, please also look > > in /var/log/setup.log.full to see if you got any error messages from > > /etc/postinstall/man.sh. > > > > > > If it is, the differences might give you a clue as to what went wrong. > > > > What is the output of "man -cd ln | tail -1"? > > > > > > Well the tail -1 did not work so the output of man -d must be on stderr. > > > > Umm, yeah, sorry, that should have been "man -cd ln 2>&1 | tail -1". > > > > > Any way the last lines are: > > > > > > not executing command: > > > (cd "/usr/man" && (echo ".pl 11i"; cat '/usr/man/man1/ln.1') | > > /usr/bin/tbl | /usr/bin/groff -Tascii -mandoc | less -is) > > > > Aha. There you go. It's the -Tascii that's the problem, as well as the > > less flags. In my installation, the command is as follows: > > > > (cd "/usr/man" && (echo ".pl 11i"; /usr/bin/cat '/usr/man/man1/ln.1') | > > /usr/bin/tbl | /usr/bin/nroff -c -mandoc | /usr/bin/less -isrR) > > > > The commands above come from /usr/share/misc/man.conf, so yes, you do > > need it. > > > > > I do know from experimentation that the zipped versions of the man > > > pages produced by the updated man command are different from the ones > > > produced by the old man command. > > > > I'm not sure what you mean. The zipped versions of the man pages aren't > > produced by the man command. They are used as inputs to the man command. > > Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ [EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! "The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
