From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200301181223.h0ICNAs20939@brother.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: perl 5.8.0 from w2k test site problems
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:23:10 +0100 (MET)
In-Reply-To: <3E294591.3B479E28@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Jan 18, 2003 12:16:17 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

According to Richard Dawe:
> A scheme like converting Foo::Bar.3 to Foo__Bar.3 might not work very well,
> because some module prefix may be > 8 characters. The resulting mappings would
> not be unique for a module prefix with lots of submodules. (My terminology is
> probably wrong here.) So VitalModule::Bar and VitalModule::Baz would have
> conflicting man page file names. We could do something similar to module names
> and put them in subdirectories, e.g. VitalModule::Bar.3 -> VitalModule/Bar.3,
> but this will require special support in our man.
> 
> The other alternative I thought of was to give up on man and fix the HTML
> pages, which may be easier to fix and not require support in man. But that's
> probably not very useful for people using plain ol' DOS.

1. Use perldoc.

2. man could call perldoc ("man B::C" -> "perldoc B::C"). The problem
is of course when to know to call perldoc.


Right,

						MartinS