Re: Uploading rman 2.5a4-1
On Tue, 21 May 1996, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Good night folks!
>
> I'll upload the next release ofrman in a few minutes.
>
[snip]
>
> A question: Should this package depend on `man'? It can only be used
> in conjunktion with formatted manpages (cat.gz archives are fine,
> too). I haven't added this, because the old version didn't have it
> included.
IMHO if it can work without man, it shouldn't depend on man. And from the
description, it looks like it can work without man. So... no.
Christian
PS In fact isn't rman a 'reverse-man'? Then I think it *shouldn't* depend
on man.
Reply to: