> > >is invoked from /opt/bin which then sets the environment
> > >before launching the application from /opt/application/bin.
> > >
> > So add a man link farm as /opt/man to match those in
> > /opt/bin
> >
> It does work, though migh not be pretty if you have
> many man pages.
>
Also, I
>
>
>
> >Some of the ways to work out environment for /opt
> >applications are
> >
> > a) You add PATH, MANPATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc to all
> >
> Handled by man by default with AUTOPATH so
> MANPATH can be left alone. Just fix PATH
>
Again, this is only handled if your files you have man pages
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Thomas Dodd wrote:
> Riku Meskanen wrote:
> > a) You add PATH, MANPATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc to all
> >
> Handled by man by default with AUTOPATH so
> MANPATH can be left alone. Just fix PATH
>
Yes I hear you. You explained it already on your first
post, no offence but no need
Riku Meskanen wrote:
>On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Thomas Dodd wrote:
>
>>So the package needs to drop a file in /etc/profile.d
>>that sets the executable path to /opt/foo/bin
>>and man will aututomatically add /opt/foo/man
>>to the MANPATH. It will also look for /opt/foo/bin/man
>>if you don't want se
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Thomas Dodd wrote:
>
> So the package needs to drop a file in /etc/profile.d
> that sets the executable path to /opt/foo/bin
> and man will aututomatically add /opt/foo/man
> to the MANPATH. It will also look for /opt/foo/bin/man
> if you don't want seperate bin and man dirs f
>
>
>
> James Olin Oden wrote:
>
> ><- SNIP ->
>
> I like the man.config.d idea, but I think gnu-man has a solution already
> in place.
>
> In the man(1) page MANPATH_MAP and the NOAUTOPATH control the
> automatic construction of MANPATH.
>
> if NOAUTOPATH is not set in /etc/man.config then
James Olin Oden wrote:
><- SNIP ->
>
>>IMHO, best way I can think would be to enhance GNU man to
>>support include directory, like xinetd with /etc/xinetd.d,
>>logrotate with /etc/logrotate.d etc.
>>
>>Thus patch it use /etc/man.config.d if it already doesn't
>>and contrib to project :)
>>
I l
On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> > I was first thinking making these better configurable options,
> > but the package does not use recent autoconfigure, so I simply
> > made patches active by default. NOCONFIGD and NOGLOB can
> > consequtively disable the features if not desired.
> >
>
> On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Riku Meskanen wrote:
> >
> Ok, spent some more time on it and it config directory is
> now fully functional with relevant IMHO security checks etc.
>
Thanks Riku. I will download them today and try them out. Also,
as soon as I get a chance I will closely examine your pa
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Riku Meskanen wrote:
>
> I'm still thinking /etc/man.config.d/ support possibilities.
>
> As the /etc/man.config is just flat config with really no
> really need stacked options or anything and the /etc/man.config.d/
> could be achieved simply modifying read_config_file() to t
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> > I'm often more on design than a straight forward solution,
> > but you are right GNU man does not support /opt/*/man well,
> > hey that could be another way, enhance the GNU man to support
> > wildcards with glob() ... something like this
> >
> I li
<- SNIP ->
> IMHO, best way I can think would be to enhance GNU man to
> support include directory, like xinetd with /etc/xinetd.d,
> logrotate with /etc/logrotate.d etc.
>
> Thus patch it use /etc/man.config.d if it already doesn't
> and contrib to project :)
>
Actually, I do think that idea is
On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Riku Meskanen wrote:
>
> Don't think GNU man is not SUID-root or SGID-man any
> recent distribution or is it?
>
Sorry my goof, I should learn rereading
before submitting :/
Drop the *not* and it becomes clear what I was trying to say, thus
| I don't think GNU man is SUID-roo
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> > >
> > The /opt/package/{etc,bin,man} practise can lead to quite riducule
> > length with PATH, MANPATH etc. components when you have plenty
> > of softare in your system, so beware.
> >
> Agreed, bu
>
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> >
> The /opt/package/{etc,bin,man} practise can lead to quite riducule
> length with PATH, MANPATH etc. components when you have plenty
> of softare in your system, so beware.
>
Agreed, but there are times when you don't want your stuff to go in
On Thu, 25 Apr 2002, James Olin Oden wrote:
> I guess since know one has responded to this question concerning a
> clean way for an RPM to alter the MANPATH (i.e. alter it non-destructively
> and using a safe mechanism to do so) says that there is not such a
> clean method (please someone correct
>
> > I guess since know one has responded to this question concerning a
> > clean way for an RPM to alter the MANPATH (i.e. alter it non-destructively
> > and using a safe mechanism to do so) says that there is not such a
> > clean method (please someone correct me if I am wrong). If this is
> I guess since know one has responded to this question concerning a
> clean way for an RPM to alter the MANPATH (i.e. alter it non-destructively
> and using a safe mechanism to do so) says that there is not such a
> clean method (please someone correct me if I am wrong). If this is the case
>
I guess since know one has responded to this question concerning a
clean way for an RPM to alter the MANPATH (i.e. alter it non-destructively
and using a safe mechanism to do so) says that there is not such a
clean method (please someone correct me if I am wrong). If this is the case
then perha
Hi All,
I have built a set of RPMs that install to some place like:
/usr/build
with bin, man and lib directories under their. I would like to
in the RPM make the man pages from these RPM's available. I tried
altering the MANPATH, but when I did this it completely overrided
/etc/man.c
20 matches
Mail list logo
