[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark
From: |
Ingo Schwarze |
Subject: |
Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark |
Date: |
Sun, 16 Feb 2020 23:26:07 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) |
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Conrad wrote on Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 03:45:16PM -0800:
> I neglected to mention that the page is for a very specialized command
> and is unlikely to exist in other than PDF format except on my system.
> Everyone using it so far is running Windows, so no one is likely to say
> "man <program>".
Oh. Seeing you ask a question about the formatting of a manual page
on a public list concerned with free software, i jumped to the conclusion
that you wanted to publish this page as a part of some free software
package. Sorry for that. Of course there is nothing wrong with using
free software in any way that is convenient for private purposes.
> Perhaps man(7) format wasn't the best choice, but it was a quick (and
> perhaps dirty) way to provided some documentation that might not
> otherwise have been provided. A couple of people mentioned the lack of
> bookmarks, which does seem pretty lame for 2020. Perhaps a better
> alternative would be to rewrite the page in texinfo to avoid confusion,
> though in this context, I'm not sure the effort is justified.
And at this point, the man(7) language is better maintained and appears
to have more of a future than texinfo, which has been a lame duck now
for at least half a decade, probably longer:
https://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg08172.html
> Anyway, thanks for the observation, which I might have not thought of
> (one person did ask about a Linux port). Using the MKS environment, I
> sometimes forget that most *nix environments have diverged considerably
> from mine in the last 15 years (the MKS man command doesn't appear to
> format anything, expecting formatted files to reside in */cat? directories
> as on most Unix systems long ago).
Heh. That's one man(1) implementation i have most likely never seen.
They even provide a fairly details reference manual online:
https://www.mkssoftware.com/docs/man1/man.1.asp
And indeed, below FILES, it says:
man[0-9]/*.[0-9]
unformatted reference pages.
Note:
Unformated reference pages are not currently supported.
Reference pages stored in these directories are treated
as pre-formatted pages.
But this page lists groff:
https://www.mkssoftware.com/docs/cmd_index.asp
So the tools are there, and the gap shouldn't be too hard to close
for you! ;-)
Yours,
Ingo
- man Macro Package and pdfmark, Jeff Conrad, 2020/02/13
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Steffen Nurpmeso, 2020/02/13
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Ingo Schwarze, 2020/02/14
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Steffen Nurpmeso, 2020/02/14
- RE: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Jeff Conrad, 2020/02/14
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Ingo Schwarze, 2020/02/15
- RE: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Jeff Conrad, 2020/02/15
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Deri, 2020/02/15
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark,
Ingo Schwarze <=
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Werner LEMBERG, 2020/02/16
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Larry McVoy, 2020/02/16
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, John Gardner, 2020/02/16
- Re: man Macro Package and pdfmark, Larry McVoy, 2020/02/16
- [groff] An alternative to info(1) ?, Mike Bianchi, 2020/02/17
- Re: [groff] An alternative to info(1) ?, Ulrich Lauther, 2020/02/17
- Re: [groff] An alternative to info(1) ?, Jan Stary, 2020/02/17
- Re: [groff] An alternative to info(1) ?, Nate Bargmann, 2020/02/17
- Re: An alternative to info(1) ?, Morten Bo Johansen, 2020/02/17
- Re: An alternative to info(1) ?, Nate Bargmann, 2020/02/17