Re: C-x m versus m in Gnus [manual versions]

[Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com>]

ShengHuo ZHU <zsh@cs.rochester.edu> writes:

> Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Excuse me butting in here belatedly:
> > 
> > The var suggested by Kai `gnus-user-agent',  is there documentation on
> > this somewhere?
> > 
> > Running 5.8.8 of several months  vintage my INFO manual shows:
> > 
> >         This manual corresponds to Gnus 5.7.  
> > 
> > and has no documentation of this variable So updating via cvs I see I
> > now have `Oort Gnus v0.01.  Which still says 5.7 and still doesn't
> > contain any hits on `gnus-user-agent'.
> 
> I guess you did not *install* the manual or the installed manual is
> not in Info path.
> 
> > If using the variable allows the former RMAIL commands like C-x m to
> > work in gnus, is it also possible to get the RMAIL command:
> > 
> > `C-x 5 m' (`compose-mail-other-frame') to work for gnus?
> 
> Implemented in oGnus v0.01.

I found the source of my confusion with manual versions.

I keep pgnus somewhat current and have aimed emacs at its lisp and
texi directories.  My last update (info pages) was old enough to still
say 5.8.7  Although it was a somewhat old version of 5.8.8.

After cvs updating yesterday I used the info reader to look at the new
info file `pgnus/texi/gnus'  I used the -f flag to open the file
directly or so I thought.  But still saw 5.7 manual version.

This command info -f gnus  (while in texi directory)

Finally I looked up `info info' to see if I had it wrong.  Guess what,
I couldn't find the `-f' operator in `info info'  No section with
title like `Options' either.  (except internal options).

Using `s' search and inserting `-f' gives lots of hits but none of
them are about the `-f' option.
 
Finally resorted to `man info' and found the option immediately.
And an example:

      info -f ./foo.info
              show file ./foo.info, not searching dir

Notice the ./  
he he... Even with `info -f file' I was still getting the 5.7 manual,
because I hadn't thought to say ./file