On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 10:50:39AM +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> writes: > > I wouldn't even mind if we had both /usr/local/man and /usr/local/share/man > > so long as our default MANPATH included both if that means applying fewer > > patches to ports. > > The default MANPATH is constructed dynamically from PATH: > > 1. From each component of the user's PATH for the first of: > - pathname/man > - pathname/MAN > - If pathname ends with /bin: pathname/../man > Note: Special logic exists to make /bin and /usr/bin look in > /usr/share/man for manual files. > > If we change this to: > > 1. From each component of the user's PATH for the first of: > - pathname/man > - pathname/MAN > - If pathname ends with /bin or /sbin: pathname/../man and > pathname/../share/man Which I have just done :)
Bapt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
