Re: Wait, it *DOES* say all programs! (was Re: Custom undocumented(7)s)

[Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net>]

Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:

> Chris Waters wrote:
> > Actually....checking...this seems to be true, and I don't think we
> > want it to be true.  Every program that's found in the default path,
> > yes, but I was certainly under the impression that we don't want or
> > need man pages for what might be called "private binaries",
> > i.e. programs not intended to be run directly -- programs that should
> > usually be found in /usr/lib/whatsit.

> Well I don't know, policy paints all library function calls with the
> same brush:

True, but library functions are externally visible (at least if you're
a programmer), while private binaries generally aren't.  It may seem a
little strange to argue that some binaries shouldn't have man pages
while lib functions should, but that's mostly because we've been so
lax about providing man pages for lib functions.  I think.  :-)

> The point seems to be, if it's something people would reasonably
> expect find a man page on, something should be done.

Yes, that seems reasonable.  But I'm afraid it's ambiguous.  The
question is, what *would* we reasonably expect to find man pages on?
Do private binaries fall into that category?  I'd say not, but I'm
just one opinion....

cheers
-- 
Chris Waters   xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
      or    xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr     | this .signature file.