| 1 |
On 2009-02-06, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 08:17:46 +0100 (CET), Jesús Guerrero wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Well, in that sense, ALL the man pages of for anything that's more |
| 5 |
>> complext than ls will be horrible. There's no way to can shorten |
| 6 |
>> it unless you take features off from bash. It's a very powerful |
| 7 |
>> shell. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Same goes for my other example: fvwm. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> And for mplayer/mencoder. The problem is that man pages are |
| 12 |
> single pages and therefore only suitable for fairly short |
| 13 |
> documents. The alternative, as used by zsh, is to split the |
| 14 |
> information into several man pages, then you never know which |
| 15 |
> one to look at. procmail is a good example of how to do this |
| 16 |
> badly, with procmailrc's documentation being split across |
| 17 |
> three man pages. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> That's why info is a much better format for complex or |
| 20 |
> multipurpose programs. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
That's one opinion, but I think info very difficult to use. I |
| 23 |
much prefer a single page. Stuff in info is always broken up |
| 24 |
into pieces that are way too small. Whatever organization |
| 25 |
there is supposed to be in info is impossible to perceive while |
| 26 |
you're looking at a page, and it's way to easy to end up in |
| 27 |
documentation for something completely unrelated. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> You'd expect to find a list of contents, chapters and an index |
| 30 |
> in a printed reference book, electronic documentation should |
| 31 |
> be no different. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Perhaps, but I think info is an awful implementation. A single |
| 34 |
large man page is much better, and a single large html page |
| 35 |
with links in it is far, far, better. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Grant Edwards grante Yow! HELLO, everybody, |
| 39 |
at I'm a HUMAN!! |
| 40 |
visi.com |
Archives