Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-05-04 Thread Jan Stary
> > The problem with symlinks is that they need to be updated to match > > manpage compression. `.so` works with any compression used for the > > manpage. That's not a problem with symlinks, but a problem with manpage compression. Why would anyone compress manpages? How much space does that save

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-05-04 Thread Alexis
Jan Stary writes: That's not a problem with symlinks, but a problem with manpage compression. Why would anyone compress manpages? How much space does that save overall? [snip example] Tens of megabytes saved, in the whole system. Absoultely not worth the hassle. i personally agree, but

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-05-03 Thread Alexis
"G. Branden Robinson" writes: In practice, as I understand it, `so` doesn't achieve anything for man pages that can't be done with symbolic links and (importantly) a man page indexer that is symlink-aware. Perhaps `so` support was preserved, and its practice retained, for a long time becau

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-05-02 Thread Alexis
"G. Branden Robinson" writes: In practice, as I understand it, `so` doesn't achieve anything for man pages that can't be done with symbolic links and (importantly) a man page indexer that is symlink-aware. Perhaps `so` support was preserved, and its practice retained, for a long time becau

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-04-30 Thread G. Branden Robinson
[dropped the mandoc list; they won't let me post] At 2023-04-30T13:44:09+0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 07:05:55AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > > The latter choice is a better one from a design perspective, in my > > opinion, because it is more general. On the other ha

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-04-30 Thread Colin Watson
On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 07:05:55AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > The latter choice is a better one from a design perspective, in my > opinion, because it is more general. On the other hand, man pages > sourcing the text of pages from other sections on the manual seems about > as unlikely as

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-04-30 Thread G. Branden Robinson
At 2023-04-30T09:24:42+1000, Alexis wrote: > Ping. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? It's a small but > persistent irritation on my system. :-) Hi Alexis, The groff(7) man page is pretty terse about this request. Our Texinfo manual says more. 5.33 I/O 'gtroff' has several request

Re: Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-04-29 Thread Alexis
Ping. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? It's a small but persistent irritation on my system. :-) Alexis writes: [1. text/plain] Hi all, On my Gentoo system, awk.1 simply contains an .so request whose argument is the man page for the actual awk implementation in use, i.e. just:

Behaviour of .so differs between mandoc and groff

2023-04-21 Thread Alexis
Hi all, On my Gentoo system, awk.1 simply contains an .so request whose argument is the man page for the actual awk implementation in use, i.e. just: .so gawk.1 However, although this works when using man-db, it doesn't when one is using mandoc instead, as on my system. Instead of gawk