Your message dated Sun, 28 Jun 2009 18:32:07 +0100
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: base: manpages lookups vs binary lookups don't match
has caused the Debian Bug report #521156,
regarding base: manpages lookups vs binary lookups don't match
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
521156: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=521156
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: base
Severity: important
by default, man will first lookup manpages in /usr/share/man and after that,
look in
/usr/local/share/man. While for execution bash will first look in
/usr/local/bin and then in
/usr/bin. This creates an inconsistensy between the manpage you get and what
you execute.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: squeeze/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.28-1-686 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:30:38PM +0100, Sebastian wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:18:03AM +0100, Sebastian S wrote:
> >> by default, man will first lookup manpages in /usr/share/man and after
> >> that, look in
> >> /usr/local/share/man. While for execution bash will first look in
> >> /usr/local/bin and then in
> >> /usr/bin. This creates an inconsistensy between the manpage you get and
> >> what you execute.
> >
> > Thanks for your report. However, as far as I can tell this is not in
> > fact the case. 'man --debug man' says:
> >
> > *manpath search path* =
> > /home/cjwatson/man:/usr/local/man:/usr/local/share/man:/usr/share/man:/usr/X11R6/man
> >
> > Could you please provide some evidence of the symptoms you're seeing,
> > including the version of man-db on your system? The full output of 'man
> > --debug' for an example manual page would be best.
>
> Apologies, I was testing on an old etch machine.
> Where I got the following:
>
>
> check_and_give(): adding /usr/share/man/en
> adding /usr/share/man/en to manpathlist
> adding /usr/local/man to manpathlist
> adding /usr/local/share/man to manpathlist
> adding /usr/share/man to manpathlist
> *manpath search path* =
> /usr/share/man/en:/usr/local/man:/usr/local/share/man:/usr/share/man
> --priv_drop_count = 0
> searching in /usr/share/man/en, section 1
> trying section 1 with globbing
> Layout is GNU (1)
>
>
> But I supose you can ignore the report :)
Thanks for your feedback. I think this should indeed be a lot better as
of (at least) 2.5.4. This NEWS item summarises the change although it
encompassed quite a few bugs of this general kind:
o The manpath was built completely wrongly when multiple entries
were present in LANGUAGE: duplicates were handled strangely, and
languages were effectively iterated in reverse order. It should be
rather more sensible now.
I'll close this bug now; sorry for the delay.
--
Colin Watson [[email protected]]
--- End Message ---
