Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #201686 > unrolled thread

Online copies of textinfo content available?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  Online copies of textinfo content available? Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2018-10-26 16:50 +0200
    Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-26 17:10 +0200
    Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-10-26 17:10 +0200
    Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-10-26 17:50 +0200
    Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2018-10-26 19:30 +0200
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-26 20:20 +0200
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2018-10-27 10:20 +0200
          Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-10-29 17:00 +0100
            Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2018-11-02 05:00 +0100
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2018-10-29 07:30 +0100
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-10-26 20:20 +0200
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-10-26 20:30 +0200
          Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-10-26 22:00 +0200
            Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2018-10-27 00:50 +0200
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2018-10-29 07:30 +0100
    Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Dennis Wicks <wix@mgssub.com> - 2018-10-26 22:20 +0200
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2018-10-26 22:20 +0200
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Dennis Wicks <wix@mgssub.com> - 2018-10-26 22:30 +0200
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-26 22:30 +0200
      Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-26 23:50 +0200
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-10-27 00:10 +0200
          Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-27 00:20 +0200
            Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-10-27 03:40 +0200
              Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-10-27 11:10 +0200
                Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? rhkramer@gmail.com - 2018-10-27 15:30 +0200
          Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2018-10-27 01:10 +0200
        Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Erik Christiansen <dvalin@internode.on.net> - 2018-10-29 07:40 +0100
          Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2018-10-29 16:30 +0100
            Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-29 21:20 +0100
            Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-10-29 21:30 +0100
              Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2018-10-29 22:00 +0100
                Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2018-10-29 22:20 +0100
              Re: Online copies of textinfo content available? Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2018-10-30 09:40 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#201686 — Online copies of textinfo content available?

Many man pages end with:
> The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the command
> 
>     info XYZ
> 
> should give you access to the complete manual.

I have problems with that.
1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether or
    not the package might be useful.
2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
    {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#201687

On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 09:41:54 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:

> Many man pages end with:
> > The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the command
> > 
> >     info XYZ
> > 
> > should give you access to the complete manual.
> 
> I have problems with that.
> 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether or
>    not the package might be useful.
> 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
>    {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.

apt install pinfo

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201688

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:41:54AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>Many man pages end with:
>>The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the command
>>
>>    info XYZ
>>
>>should give you access to the complete manual.
>
>I have problems with that.
>1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether or
>   not the package might be useful.
>2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
>   {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.

see
https://www.gnu.org/software/ed/manual/ed_manual.html

The coreutils manpages have switched to saying something like
       Full documentation at: <https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/ls>
       or available locally via: info '(coreutils) ls invocation'

You could file a wishlist for other projects to do something similar. 
I think most (all?) of the GNU docs are available as above, and I don't 
know many projects that use info and aren't GNU.

Mike Stone

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201690

On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 09:41:54 (-0500), Richard Owlett wrote:
> Many man pages end with:
> > The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the command
> > 
> >     info XYZ
> > 
> > should give you access to the complete manual.
> 
> I have problems with that.
> 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether or
>    not the package might be useful.

Web searches can be quite useful!

> 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
>    {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2017/04/msg00616.html
has dropped out of your database perhaps.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201695

On Friday 26 October 2018 10:41:54 Richard Owlett wrote:

> Many man pages end with:
> > The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If
> > the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the
> > command
> >
> >     info XYZ
> >
> > should give you access to the complete manual.

But one never knows what the next keypress will do, so anyplace it 
says "info" sub it to be "pinfo" which shows you the same data, but has 
a sensible interface.

> I have problems with that.

Figures, its Richard  O. :)

> 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether
> or not the package might be useful.
> 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
>     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.

Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to be 
an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All of 
us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, so 
there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man 
page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man 
page looks like.

-- 
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201700

On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 13:20:36 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> On Friday 26 October 2018 10:41:54 Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
> > Many man pages end with:
> > > The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo manual. If
> > > the info > and XYZ programs are properly installed at your site, the
> > > command
> > >
> > >     info XYZ
> > >
> > > should give you access to the complete manual.
> 
> But one never knows what the next keypress will do, so anyplace it 
> says "info" sub it to be "pinfo" which shows you the same data, but has 
> a sensible interface.
> 
> > I have problems with that.
> 
> Figures, its Richard  O. :)
> 
> > 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether
> > or not the package might be useful.
> > 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
> >     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.
> 
> Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to be 
> an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All of 
> us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, so 
> there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man 
> page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man 
> page looks like.

An excellent man page. Intended for masochists and those who have all
the time in the world to read and absorb it. :)

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201735

On 2018-10-26 19:17, Brian wrote:
  >     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.
>> 
>> Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to 
>> be
>> an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All 
>> of
>> us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, 
>> so
>> there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man
>> page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man
>> page looks like.
> 
> An excellent man page. Intended for masochists and those who have all
> the time in the world to read and absorb it. :)

I made the mistake of printing out man bash once. It's really, really 
long

mick

-- 
Key ID    4BFEBB31

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201845

On Sat 27 Oct 2018 at 09:19:15 (+0100), mick crane wrote:
> On 2018-10-26 19:17, Brian wrote:
>  >     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.
> > > 
> > > Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there
> > > seems to be
> > > an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it
> > > all. All of
> > > us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse
> > > wheel, so
> > > there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man
> > > page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man
> > > page looks like.
> > 
> > An excellent man page. Intended for masochists and those who have all
> > the time in the world to read and absorb it. :)
> 
> I made the mistake of printing out man bash once. It's really, really long

Some of the longer man pages (eg bash, fvwm, video programs) are
rather unmanageable when just presented as flat text, even when
coloured, but I find this line useful for generating a little
library of PDFs that are much easier to skim through with your
favourite viewer:

$ man -t foo | ps2pdf - - > path-to-your-library/foo.pdf

But perhaps don't print them (on paper)! Some run to well over 100 pages.

Where there's a Texinfo source available, there may be a better method
via TeX. Anyone?

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201980

On 29.10.18 10:58, David Wright wrote:
> On Sat 27 Oct 2018 at 09:19:15 (+0100), mick crane wrote:
> > I made the mistake of printing out man bash once. It's really, really long
> 
> Some of the longer man pages (eg bash, fvwm, video programs) are
> rather unmanageable when just presented as flat text, even when
> coloured, but I find this line useful for generating a little
> library of PDFs that are much easier to skim through with your
> favourite viewer:
> 
> $ man -t foo | ps2pdf - - > path-to-your-library/foo.pdf

There's also:

man2html - browse man pages in your web browser
man2html-base - convert man pages into HTML format

(Not tried here - I'm fine with monochrome manpages.)

Erik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201830

On 26.10.18 19:17, Brian wrote:
> On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 13:20:36 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to be 
> > an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All of 
> > us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, so 
> > there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man 
> > page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man 
> > page looks like.
> 
> An excellent man page. Intended for masochists and those who have all
> the time in the world to read and absorb it. :)

TBT, I've never read more than the few islands of text brought up by a
search for a term of interest, then a second search term learnt from
that. In-search-read-out. Job done in minimal time. Much faster and
easier than info bumpf, unless it's flattened with vim, to make it like
a manpage.

Erik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201701

On Friday, October 26, 2018 01:20:36 PM Gene Heskett wrote:
> Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to be
> an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All of
> us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, so
> there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man
> page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man
> page looks like.

Just to chime in, my problem with the bash man page is knowing whether a given 
command is a bash built-in or external command -- if built-in, I'll find 
information within the man page.

I usually first look for a standalone man page, but if I don't find it, it could 
be either because it is a bash built-in or because there is no manpage.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201704

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 02:12:29PM -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> Just to chime in, my problem with the bash man page is knowing whether a given 
> command is a bash built-in or external command -- if built-in, I'll find 
> information within the man page.
> 
> I usually first look for a standalone man page, but if I don't find it, it could 
> be either because it is a bash built-in or because there is no manpage.  

Use the "type" command to see.

wooledg:~$ type cd
cd is a shell builtin
wooledg:~$ type ls
ls is hashed (/bin/ls)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201709

On Friday, October 26, 2018 02:22:32 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 02:12:29PM -0400, rhkramer@gmail.com wrote:
> > Just to chime in, my problem with the bash man page is knowing whether a
> > given command is a bash built-in or external command -- if built-in,
> > I'll find information within the man page.
> > 
> > I usually first look for a standalone man page, but if I don't find it,
> > it could be either because it is a bash built-in or because there is no
> > manpage.
> 
> Use the "type" command to see.
> 
> wooledg:~$ type cd
> cd is a shell builtin
> wooledg:~$ type ls
> ls is hashed (/bin/ls)

Ahh, wonderful -- thank you!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201727

On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 06:50, <rhkramer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, October 26, 2018 02:22:32 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:

> > Use the "type" command to see.
> >
> > wooledg:~$ type cd
> > cd is a shell builtin
> > wooledg:~$ type ls
> > ls is hashed (/bin/ls)
>
> Ahh, wonderful -- thank you!

See also 'help type' for more guidance.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201829

On 26.10.18 13:20, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 26 October 2018 10:41:54 Richard Owlett wrote:
> > 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find out whether
> > or not the package might be useful.
> > 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser acceptable format
> >     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.
> 
> Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there seems to be 
> an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it all. All of 
> us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse wheel, so 
> there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man 
> page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man 
> page looks like.

Yup, the info menu maze is an irritating impediment. But there is so
much more information in the "as" and "ld" info files than their
corresponding manpages, that they are an essential resource.
Solution: View the info files with vim. Now they're flat files, just
like a manpage, and you can search and weave freely. Problem (info)
eliminated! (And productivity restored.)

Erik

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201714

Richard Owlett wrote on 10/26/18 9:41 AM:
> Many man pages end with:
>> The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo
>> manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly
>> installed at your site, the command
>>
>>     info XYZ
>>
>> should give you access to the complete manual.
> 
> I have problems with that.
> 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find
> out whether or
>    not the package might be useful.
> 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser
> acceptable format
>    {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more
> functional.
> 
> 

I agree, and I have found a lot of info "complete manual"s
to be exactly like the man page!

Another thing you can try is

	sudo apt show XYZ

That will give you a bunch of info including a few lines of
description. Usually enough to decide whether to pursue that
package further.

Good Luck!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201715

On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:13:20PM -0500, Dennis Wicks wrote:
> 	sudo apt show XYZ

For the record, you don't need to be root to use apt show, or apt-cache show.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201717

Greg Wooledge wrote on 10/26/18 3:16 PM:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:13:20PM -0500, Dennis Wicks wrote:
>> 	sudo apt show XYZ
> 
> For the record, you don't need to be root to use apt show, or apt-cache show.
> 
> 
> 
Right you are! I guess it has become such a habit I just do
it automatically!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201719

Dennis Wicks writes:
> Another thing you can try is

> 	sudo apt show XYZ

> That will give you a bunch of info including a few lines of
> description. Usually enough to decide whether to pursue that
> package further.

That will give you the complete package description (and sudo is not
needed).

-- 
John Hasler 
jhasler@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#201721

On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 15:13:20 -0500, Dennis Wicks wrote:

> 
> 
> Richard Owlett wrote on 10/26/18 9:41 AM:
> > Many man pages end with:
> >> The full documentation for Ed is maintained as a Texinfo
> >> manual. If the info > and XYZ programs are properly
> >> installed at your site, the command
> >>
> >>     info XYZ
> >>
> >> should give you access to the complete manual.
> > 
> > I have problems with that.
> > 1. I don't want to install unneeded packages just to find
> > out whether or
> >    not the package might be useful.
> > 2. The info output has an annoying format. A browser
> > acceptable format
> >    {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more
> > functional.
> > 
> > 
> 
> I agree, and I have found a lot of info "complete manual"s
> to be exactly like the man page!

Please give an example.

-- 
Brian.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web