Dirk Eddelbuettel writes ("Re: Bug#1737: missing man pages for accouting
commands "):
> I am sure I once saw an explicit statement saying that the GNU operating
> system will use info as its main source of documentation, but I can't
> remember where that was. There is a
CD Rasmussen writes:
CD> In the case of the acct package missing a man page, I don't think it is
CD> important that you write one or if the author is dead set against them
CD> (which has not been shown to me), but it is important that we keep the
CD> information that reminds the author t
volunteer to write it if we promised to
give her tech advice and to critique it for her?
I hope you guys can work out something. I will not be around to see
your reply since I'm traveling in the middle east for the next 2 weeks.
Thanks for the time, Dirk.
Costa
Subject: Bug#1737: mis
Dirk Eddelbuettel writes ("Bug#1737: missing man pages for accouting commands"):
> Susan G Kleinmann writes:
> Susan> The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
> Susan> acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
>
>
Susan G Kleinmann writes:
Susan> The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
Susan> acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
True, but that is a bug in the upstream version that I as the maintainer
can't do anything about but writing the man page myself. A
Package: acct
Version: 5-12
The man page and the info page for 'acct' refer the reader to
acct(5) for additional information. No such page exists.
Likewise, there are no man pages for `ac', `accton', `lastcomm',
and `sa'. Even though much of the relevant information is covered in
the texinfo d
6 matches
Mail list logo
