Re: bin/1904

[Abhinav Upadhyay <er.abhinav.upadhyay%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 10:10 PM, David Holland
<dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost> wrote:
> The following reply was made to PR bin/1904; it has been noted by GNATS.
>
> From: David Holland <dholland-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost>
> To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: bin/1904
> Date: Sat, 28 May 2016 16:36:05 +0000
>
>  On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 09:50:00AM +0000, Abhinav Upadhyay wrote:
>   >  Is this still relevant?
>   >  The first two issues regarding apropos and whatis are not valid anymore
>   >  as we don't use whatis.db for them.
>   >
>   >  Not quite sure about the 3rd and 4th points.
>
>  The last point (the one about bsd.man.mk using catman) is wrong; or at
>  least, not useful. The build rules in the default man.conf are supposed
>  to be consistent with the build rules in the makefiles; using custom
>  rules from an installed man.conf is not consistent with the principle
>  of the build being self-contained, cross builds working reliably, etc.
>  Also it's only relevant if one is generating cat pages at build time,
>  which has not been the default for some years now.

I guess that settles the 4th point as not being useful (in present time).

>  The other point "catman doesn't work with /etc/man.conf and linked
>  manpages" ... not even sure what that means. However, I guess we might
>  want some of the patches to catman(8) in here...

As per the description of the 3rd patch, it means that catman doesn't
parse and use the rules from /etc/man.conf and, it also doesn't handle
the symlinked or hard linked man pages, the patch fixes those issues.

I think those are useful fixes if we are going to maintain catman.
-
Abhinav