From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-7874-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 8280 invoked from network); 16 Sep 1999 16:21:57 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 16 Sep 1999 16:21:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 21020 invoked by alias); 16 Sep 1999 16:21:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 7874
Received: (qmail 21013 invoked from network); 16 Sep 1999 16:21:51 -0000
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 17:21:50 +0100
From: Adam Spiers <adam@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk>
To: zsh workers mailing list <zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk>
Subject: Re: _man only uses $manpath
Message-ID: <19990916172150.B17822@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Adam Spiers <adam@spiers.net>
Mail-Followup-To: zsh workers mailing list <zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk>
References: <19990916165431.D17248@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> <Pine.SV4.4.10.9909162018050.11203-100000@itsrm2.mow.siemens.ru>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.4.10.9909162018050.11203-100000@itsrm2.mow.siemens.ru>
X-URL: http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/
X-OS: Linux 2.2.9 i686

Andrej Borsenkow (Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru) wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Adam Spiers wrote:
> 
> > Shouldn't _man calculate man page completions using `man -w' rather
> > than $manpath?  For me, $manpath is always empty, so man doesn't
> > complete anything.
> > 
> > Is it safe to assume that `-w' is present in all sensible versions of
> > man?
> 
> No. It is not supported on our system at least. And here I do need
> $MANPATH.

Hmm.  What about man --path?  Maybe only the GNU man has it.

Sounds like we need some way of intelligently figuring out a solution
for both scenarios.  Does `man -w' return an error of some sort on
your system which we could test for?