Re: man integration with tramp

[Michael Albinus]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> I'm trying to use woman.el as basis for support of remote man pages,
>> because a short review of man.el gave me the impression that it takes
>> more than just replacing `call-process' by `process-file' at one place.
>
> I understand.  If doing so will solve enough use cases, it's a good
> compromise, of course.

I'll give it a try. If it turns out to be too complex, I'll give up with
woman.el, promised!

Btw, one advantage using woman.el instead of man.el would be, that you
could handle remote man pages for Tramp methods which do not support
remote processes, like sftp or maybe even ftp.

Best regards, Michael.