Re: umask has no man page?
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 12:26 AM, The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 11/02/2014 at 10:12 AM, Joel Rees wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> Seems to be done, not by symlink, but in the man db.
>
> What leads you to that conclusion?
>
> AFAIK, if 'man xyz' brings up a man page from section 1, then there is
> an xyz.1 or xyz.1.gz somewhere in the manual search paths (which I think
> are defined in /etc/manpath.config).
>
> Since 'man umask' brings up 'BASH_BUILTINS(1)' for you, there must be a
> umask.1 or umask.1.gz somewhere, which presumably either is a copy of or
> is a symlink to builtins.1.gz.
>
> If that doesn't follow, then there must be something about manual
> structure which I don't even know I don't understand.
Well,
$ find /usr/ -name "*umask*"
/usr/lib/perl/5.14.2/auto/POSIX/umask.al
/usr/share/man/man2/umask.2.gz
/usr/share/man/man3/getumask.3.gz
/usr/share/man/man8/pam_umask.8.gz
/usr/share/man/ja/man2/umask.2.gz
/usr/share/man/ja/man3/getumask.3.gz
/usr/share/ri/1.9.1/system/Shell/umask-i.ri
/usr/share/ri/1.9.1/system/File/umask-c.ri
/usr/share/ri/1.8/system/Shell/CommandProcessor/effect_umask-i.yaml
/usr/share/ri/1.8/system/File/umask-c.yaml
find: `/usr/share/doc/google-chrome-stable': 許可がありません
/usr/share/doc/fp-docs/2.6.0/rtl/baseunix/fpumask.html
/usr/share/doc/fp-docs/2.6.0/rtl/oldlinux/syscall_nr_umask.html
/usr/share/doc/fp-docs/2.6.0/rtl/oldlinux/umask.html
find: `/usr/local/lost+found': 許可がありません
find: `/usr/lost+found': 許可がありません
I don't see any symbolic links.
--
Joel Rees
Be careful when you look at conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart,
and ask yourself if you are not your own worst enemy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well.
Reply to: