From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <794881EF-6D00-4D44-9E89-58A1EFDB05B0@fastmail.fm> From: Ethan Grammatikidis To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <20100325114948.GA7249@polynum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:02:17 +0000 References: <20100325114948.GA7249@polynum.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] Man pages for add-ons Topicbox-Message-UUID: f31f3930-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On 25 Mar 2010, at 11:49, tlaronde@polynum.com wrote: > Hello, > > Since I can finally find some time here and there, I'm back to TeX and > al. > > From namespace(4), the man pages are supposed to be under /sys/man. > > What is the canonical way for added ("opt", "pkg" ?) stuff. Letting > the user adapt his profile to bind the added stuff he wants > appearing in > his namespace? I know this isn't exactly what you're asking, but man-page namespace pollution has been something of an issue for years on unix. For example in Linux GPM and XFree86 both provided mouse(5), which was a big problem for me when I was first learning the system. I would like to see Plan 9 man support subdirs as rc does. For instance you can run ip/ping as a command, so why can't you look up ip/ ping(1)? Man pages for add-ons would have their own subdirs under the / sys/man tree, and you would reference them with a syntax like package/ pagename. -- Simplicity does not precede complexity, but follows it. -- Alan Perlis