Bug#516351: ITP: see -- lightweight Linux text file and manpage viewer
On 03/03/2009 08:25:22 AM, Mehdi Dogguy wrote:
-> MK wrote:
-> > I
-> > have not been able to find any conflicts by googling.
-> >
->
-> IMO, the best way to find conflicts is to use apt-file, not google.
Thanks for that. I actually use fedora! (no real preference, since I
don't use a desktop environment anyway and build everything from gtk on
up from source). But I do have a copy of lenny installed (which went
very smoothly, thanks for that!) so I will do this.
-> > I will probably then also use a softlink to the binary, "seeman",
-> > which shouldn't conflict either.
->
-> What will be the difference between seeman and seetxt? What's the
-> point of
-> having seetxt pointing to seeman?
"seeman" would point to seetxt.
This would be used to invoke different behavior. It is easy to
determine the name used to call the executable -- that's why "vi" and
"view" link to "vim". As it is now, you must specify whether you want
a text file (-f) or a manpage (-m). Having the softlink would be good,
I think, for the occasional user who may end up using it mostly for one
purpose or the other. This way there could also be two slightly
different manpages (this is also common) stressing these slightly
different purposes. Then, the neophyte linux user who is looking for a
better manpage viewer than just "man" could do an apropos and find
"seeman". But the actual package should be seetxt, I think, since this
is more general and a lot of the functionality makes more sense in that
context.
Mark Eriksen
Reply to: