Bug#218630: [PATCH] fix dh_installwm manpages
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:44:34PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 03:55:15PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > --- /usr/share/debhelper/autoscripts/postinst-wm 2003-07-28 15:25:17.000000000 -0400
> > +++ postinst-wm 2003-11-07 09:21:57.000000000 -0500
> > @@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
> > if [ "$1" = "configure" ]; then
> > update-alternatives --install /usr/bin/x-window-manager \
> > - x-window-manager #WM# #PRIORITY#
> > + x-window-manager #WM# #PRIORITY# \
> > + --slave /usr/share/man/man1/x-window-manager.1.gz \
> > + x-window-manager.1.gz #MANPAGE#
> > fi
>
> There may actually be a problem with installing alternatives to
> manpages.
>
> See <URL: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=218630 >.
>
> I don't know what to do about this yet.
I don't understand the problem ;-)
Why does man choose to display x-terminal-emulator(1) when I
ask it for xterm? It happens on my system (and I also have
x-terminal-emulator pointing to uxterm). From an strace, I see
man opening /var/cache/man/index.db and then choosing to open
/usr/share/man/man1/x-terminal-emulator.1.gz
But according to man(1), specifying -u should cause this database to be
updated if it no longer represents the filesystem. This doesn't help
though (man xterm still brings up x-terminal-emulator). I'm confused.
In any event, I can't produce an analagous problem with lwm/twm.
man lwm brings up the lwm(1x) manapge, man twm brings up the twm(1x)
manpage and man x-window-manager brings up lwm(1x). update-alternatives
does the correct thing (lwm and twm still come up appropriately and
x-window-manager now brings up twm(1x)).
It almost looks as if man has some special knowledge that xterm really
should mean x-terminal-emulator, which is quite ridiculous. Is there
perhaps some configuration or manpage directive I've overlooked?
--
"It's not Hollywood. War is real, war is primarily not about defeat or
victory, it is about death. I've seen thousands and thousands of dead bodies.
Do you think I want to have an academic debate on this subject?" -- Robert Fisk
Reply to: