From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se (smtp-2.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.160]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB887hWL000671 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 03:07:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91]) by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 477D614EE42 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:07:38 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-2.sys.kth.se ([130.237.32.160]) by mailscan-1.sys.kth.se (mailscan-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.91]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id oBDSuatCw9P4 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:07:36 +0100 (CET) X-KTH-Auth: kristaps [83.250.6.251] X-KTH-mail-from: kristaps@bsd.lv X-KTH-rcpt-to: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Received: from macky.local (c83-250-6-251.bredband.comhem.se [83.250.6.251]) by smtp-2.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFD1714EE39 for ; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 09:07:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4EE07044.4070605@bsd.lv> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 09:07:32 +0100 From: Kristaps Dzonsons User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 X-Mailinglist: mdocml-tech Reply-To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: chdir() in mandocdb References: <4EDF49CE.3040508@bsd.lv> <20111208013430.GD19643@iris.usta.de> In-Reply-To: <20111208013430.GD19643@iris.usta.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> I notice that the chdir() for mandocdb()'s OP_NEW is into the base >> directory of the manuals (e.g., /usr/share/man). However, when I >> run mandocdb over OpenBSD 5.0, I see a few inconsistencies: >> >> /usr/X11R6/man/man3/XUngrabDevice.3 > > That was a bug in Xenocara, i fixed it here: > > http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/xenocara/lib/libXi/man/ \ > XIUngrabDevice.man > >> /usr/X11R6/man/man3/XTranslateCoordinates.3 >> /usr/X11R6/man/man3/Xaw.3 >> ... > > These are not .so on my -current system, not sure whether > there is any problem; it doesn't seem so on first sight. > >> All of these have an `so' in the current directory. Looking at >> roff(7) for `so', this is the correct behaviour. > > No; the roff(7) manual muddles the point. > What it says is correct, but only makes sense > when you already know that man(1) does a chdir(2) > to the root of the tree. Hi Ingo, Can we disambiguate roff(7) to this effect, assuming that the man(1) behaviour is consistent across operating systems? Best, Kristaps -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv