On Sun, Mar 09, 2008 at 01:48:21AM -0500, A. Costa wrote:
> > see the '-lsman' option of dlocate.
> >
> > you should have got notification of that when 361125 was closed
> > because you were the original reporter of 361125 as well as 152207.
>
> (#152207 was opened by "Lazarus Long" in 2002.)
yep, right. misread that when i looked at it earlier.
> Granted some users require or prefer the '-man' switch output ('#
> manpagename'), but a duplicate line seems useless. A review of the
> three related bugs, (#152207, #289351, and #361125) shows that since
> 2002, four users ("Long", Metzler, Jacobson, & Costa) considered the
> duplicate lines a bug. Were we all mistaken, and if so, how?
'dlocate -man' lists the man pages in a package.
if and when there are duplicates, it is *because* there are duplicate
man pages (for different languages) in the package. dlocate doesn't just
make them up, it does it's told: list the man pages in the package.
for those who don't want to use the new -lsman option, there is and
always has been:
dlocate -man PACKAGE | sort -u
i don't consider it a bug because it's trivial for a user to use
standard tools to eliminate excess information, whereas it is impossible
for a user to re-construct information that has been thrown away. in
other words, throwing away information would be a far more serious bug,
especially when the user can easily throw it away themselves.
i can see that there are multiple valid but conflicting viewpoints on
this issue, so i'm going to err in one way or another no matter what i
do. i prefer to err based on the assumption that users are competent
and able to use standard unix tools and basic concepts like pipes.
craig
--
craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
