> This doesnt make sense: To work with ports, i never had to set PATH, > i dont need to manually call tools there, as they're often called by the > portstree itself. > And i always curse when i run 'man dpb' on my machines and never get > what i expect.
Well then the ports infrastructure should install the manual pages. The man(1) command has never before automatically looked in "source directories", which this obviously is. Install the ports infrastructure tools to /usr/local/man something or other, and call it a day. A proposal would be that the ports infrastructure have a "Let's begin working on ports" command sequence, which gets run when one starts, and voila, the documentation is now installed within man's default paths. In /usr/local, probably. Which is port's playground. > Wasnt OpenBSD supposed to be about safe defaults, and for developers ? Non sequitur. The manual tools look in specified directories of the base. It looks in "build result" directories, not "src" directories. If I make a change to /usr/src/lib/libc/sys/open.2, man does not find that file. It looks in INSTALLED directories, not some strange source directory. Why should this directory be special? To me, everything in /usr/ports smells like source, including the tooling.
