Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/01/02/11:48:54
At 10:01 AM 1/2/01 +0100, Tim Van Holder wrote:
<Snipped>
>>> I'd suggest that man changes '::' in a man page to a '/', so
>>> the man pages can be in subdirs (eg man/cat3/Foo/Bar.3).
>
>> I don't think `man' should dictate to the ported Perl how to rename
>> these files in the DJGPP port.
>No, of course not - but it would be nice if man translated '::' to
>whatever alternative the ported perl uses.
>I have my reservations about using '__' instead of '::' though; few
>packages have a name with less than three letters. This would give
>Foo__xxxxxxxxx.1, where the xxxx would only have three significant
>letters in an 8.3 system. Not a lot.
>A quick check in /usr/man/man3 on my RH6.2 box shows a few dozen
names
>that would cause trouble (a few examples: anything from Digest,
>ExtUtils
>or Getopt, as the name + __ is already 8 or longer, Pod::Parser and
>Pod::ParseUtils, and several more).
>IIRC perl uses a perl script to manufacture and install these man
>pages,
>so I think it should not be that hard to use subdirs if on DOS.
Peter?
It would not be hard to change the name to use directories (in fact,
that part is trivial), but the name would then have to be parsed to
find out what new directories to create and to create them before
writing the man file. Not real hard in perl, but currently not
implemented as part of the pod-to-man creation process. Someone would
have to write or incorporate existing perl code from elsewhere to
accomplish that task.
I realize that seems like it is worth doing, but there are many
features of the perl build and environment that are not 8.3
safe. *None* of the work I did while participating in p5p on the new
releases was done in a plain DOS environment, *only* in LFN=y DOS
boxes. I'm not real sure it *can* be made completely 8.3 safe without
major surgery that I'm also not real sure the p5p folk would go along
with.
In summary, it may well be that there will *never* be an 8.3-safe build
available for perl on DJGPP. In which case, the "::" ==> "__" choice I
made is the simplest solution (though changing it to a single "_" would
probably be accepted without any complaints).
Eli, would it be too intrusive to add a "special case" to the man clone
to check for "::" in the requested page name and automagically convert
it to "__"? Maybe only if the file open fails, so as not to interrupt
normal operation?
HTH
---------------------------------------------------------
Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR
pjfarley AT banet DOT net)
- Raw text -