On Mon 29 Oct 2018 at 10:20:30 -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Mon 29 Oct 2018 at 17:39:13 (+1100), Erik Christiansen wrote: > > On 26.10.18 22:39, Brian wrote: > > > On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 15:13:20 -0500, Dennis Wicks wrote: > > > > I agree, and I have found a lot of info "complete manual"s > > > > to be exactly like the man page! > > > > > > Please give an example. > > > > Anyone who has tried info a number of times, in the hope of finding a > > bit more information than the manpage provides, will have experienced > > the info fudge, I submit. Here's the first which I recalled: > > > > $ info xpdf > > To be fair, the first line quoted here should be split in two and > commented on separately. > > "I agree" was agreeing with the complaint of having to install extra > packages (though it wasn't made clear whether this was just info/pinfo > or foo-doc packages). > > OTOH the second part, identical man and info pages, seems an > unjustifiable criticism to me. Why should info-preferers be deprived > of reading documentation in their format. The whole point of formats > like Texinfo is that they can generate several formats from a single > master document.
It is a fact that some invocations of info (or pinfo) give pages which look like a man page. That's because it is a man page. > What Brian asked for is an example of a man page that ends with > "The full documentation for foo is maintained as a Texinfo manual" > but the info foo output has no more information than man foo. > If you are determined to find such an example, > $ zgrep 'maintained as a' /usr/share/man/man[0-9]/*z | less > might be a good place to start hunting. Asking for an example was probably a mistake; the respondents' brain cell wasn't up to it. I'd suggest licences, GFDL and DFSG could be of import. 'info info' is an example. -- Brian.