Message-Id: <m0yz04S-000S4tC@inti.gov.ar>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <salvador AT natacha DOT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
From: "Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET)" <salvador AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
Organization: INTI
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>,
        Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>,
        djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 11:49:53 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Man pages (was Re: Ispell and pipes)
References: <m0yyzXd-000S4yC AT inti DOT gov DOT ar>
In-reply-to: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980722171856.12232E-100000@is>
Precedence: bulk

Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET) wrote:
> 
> > Now: I say man pages must be in plain text format (I 
> > don't say the others must be supresed, just add .txt versions) 
> > because you need extra tools to read it.
> 
> I don't see any extra tool required: info.exe will display these man 
> pages automagically.  Just say "info ispell" and it will be displayed, 
> with all the BS characters stripped by info.exe.  You even don't need to 
> bother remembering whether Ispell has Info docs or a man page, and 
> neither do you need to remember to say "info ispell.1".

The same applies for info files.
 
> > 1) If you say: info files must be in a format readable by *any* DOS 
> > editor.
> > 2) Then I say: man pages too.
> 
> IIRC, that was not what I said back when the issue of Info files format 
> was discussed.  

Yes you asked to continue distributing the files in DOS format. Even 
when they are bigger.

> What I said was that an Info reader should be able to 
> read and display both Unix- and DOS-style Info files, because somebody 
> might edit an Info file with a DOS editor which doesn't preserve the text 
> file format (most of the DOS/Windows editors don't, they always write 
> files with a CR-LF pair at the end of every line).  In such a case, and 
> Info reader that doesn't support DOS-style text files will fail to read 
> the edited file.

InfView supports it so isn't a problem
 
> This doesn't apply to a man page, since there's no problem with editing a 
> man page, all the programs which display them support both file formats.

It looks like a circular stuff so let me put my point clear:

A) What is OK for me (personally) :

1) Info files with UNIX end of lines. Why? Size and speed when 
reading the files (no \r\n convertion, no fails when using seek).
2) Man pages in original format (backspaces included).

B) What is bullet proof and perhaps the most robust:

1) Info files in DOS format. Why? because any DOS editor will be able 
to load and show a readable text.
2) Man pages is plain text. Why? same reason as above. You lose the 
some pretty highlighting? ok, include both.

What I don't understand is why the current distribution uses B-1 + 
A-2. Looks bad.
I preffer A by far because I get the best results with it.

SET



------------------------------------ 0 --------------------------------
Visit my home page: http://set-soft.home.ml.org/
or
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Vista/6552/
Salvador Eduardo Tropea (SET). (Electronics Engineer)
Alternative e-mail: set-soft AT usa DOT net set AT computer DOT org
ICQ: 2951574
Address: Curapaligue 2124, Caseros, 3 de Febrero
Buenos Aires, (1678), ARGENTINA
TE: +(541) 759 0013