Re: Inconsistent macro notation in manual pages.

"G. Branden Robinson" <[email protected]> writes:

> Hi Alexis of the flexible beast,

lol

> Right.  Support for that form of man page specification is 
> unique to
> man-db man, as far as I know.  Colin Watson would be the 
> authority here.

Ah okay.

>> * i've been trialing using most(1) instead of less(1), and the
>>  function doesn't work with the former.
>
> Sounds like it doesn't attempt to support even the relatively 
> small
> number of command-line options specified for more(1) by the 
> POSIX
> standard.
>
> https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/utilities/more.html
>
> Maybe doing so is not part of its mission, or the program simply 
> needs
> further development.

*nod* - Well, at this point, i've just returned to using 
 less(1). Not least because i hadn't got around to manually 
 configuring vi keybindings for movement:

  https://man.archlinux.org/man/most.1.en#CONFIGURATION_FILE_SYNTAX

and almost 30 years of muscle memory was making usage awkward. :-)

(i'm not on Arch, btw ;-) - i just link to Arch's manpage 
collection as a result of my experiments for the Gentoo wiki 
finding that their collection seemed to have the best coverage.)


Alexis.
(flexibeast)