From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D4AE138C9D for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 18:48:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F1BB7E08BD; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 18:48:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 60096E085B for ; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 18:48:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YzrEh-0001Sf-6q for gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 20:48:27 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 20:48:27 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 02 Jun 2015 20:48:27 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: RFC: emerge manpage options categorization Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 18:48:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20150602144759.GB23039@vapier> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT af87825) X-Archives-Salt: 4a7a197c-563d-4f7f-8418-20b72fadcd56 X-Archives-Hash: 3f67104acbe8dff175c874213adfe6b2 Mike Frysinger posted on Tue, 02 Jun 2015 10:47:59 -0400 as excerpted: > On 12 Mar 2015 13:52, Duncan wrote: >> Tho as proposed, that all-options section may /optionally/ be moved >> into its own manpage, with an explicit note to that effect in the main >> manpage. > > i think splitting the content between two man pages is a pretty bad > idea. > would be kind of easy to get duplicate content, and even if there was a > one line note at like the top, people would miss it. Thanks. FWIW I have parts of this thread marked to followup later, so comments can still be useful if I actually do so (no promises). -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman