Re: implement .so

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de>]

On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 08:00:19PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>  * It would need to be done for both ports and Xenocara.
>  * It would need to be done in each operating and ports system
>    using mandoc; on a medium term, that may amount to at least
>    four systems (OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSD, DragonFly BSD).

Having a single script like soelim (or whatever you want to call it)
minimizes the redundancy. It should be trivial to hook up in any of the
above systems. Attached is an AWK script that prints the link target to
stdout if it unique or returns failure otherwise. Shouldn't be hard to
polish so that it takes a list of files in stdin and does the magic,
potentially including things like using zcat etc.

>  * From a maintenance perspective, .so does not seem that bad:
>    it's strictly local in main.c without tentacles into any libs.
>  * It would also put the code where it belongs: .so is a roff
>    feature, not a build system feature.

Actually, there are a number of useful cases where you have to fix it up
already. Consider using compressed man pages by default. That breaks
badly with .so.

>  * All people i'm asking tend to say i should not worry that
>    much about the my security concerns, maybe i'm indeed
>    excessively paranoid in that respect.

Allow path names relative to the current directory and with /../ in
them.

Joerg
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv