No manual entry for awk

2011-01-19 Thread Chris Velevitch
I've just downloaded and run setup.exe v 2.738 on Win 7 Ent. I've only installed 'base' and the 'vim' editor. 'base' includes awk, but the man entry for seems to be missing. How do I get it and who needs to know for future cygwin updates? Chris -- Chris Velevitch Manager - Adobe Platform Users

Re: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-19 Thread Reid Thompson
On 1/19/2011 7:08 PM, Chris Velevitch wrote: I've just downloaded and run setup.exe v 2.738 on Win 7 Ent. I've only installed 'base' and the 'vim' editor. 'base' includes awk, but the man entry for seems to be missing. How do I get it and who needs to know for future cygwin updates? Chris tr

Re: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-19 Thread Chris Velevitch
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:29, Reid Thompson wrote: > try > $ man gawk Interesting. awk is linked to gawk. That means there is an issue with the man pages because, from my experience, any time a command has multiple names, the man entry refers to all alternatives and you can get to the same man e

RE: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-19 Thread Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E]
Chris Velevitch wrote on Jan 19, 2011 at 9:58 PM >On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:29, Reid Thompson wrote: >> try >> $ man gawk > >Interesting. awk is linked to gawk. That means there is an issue with >the man pages because, from my experience, any time a command has >multiple names, the man entry refe

Re: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-19 Thread Tim Daneliuk
On 1/19/2011 10:08 PM, Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote: Chris Velevitch wrote on Jan 19, 2011 at 9:58 PM On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:29, Reid Thompson wrote: try $ man gawk Interesting. awk is linked to gawk. That means there is an issue with the man pages because, from my experience,

Re: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-20 Thread Corinna Vinschen
On Jan 20 13:58, Chris Velevitch wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:29, Reid Thompson wrote: > > try > > $ man gawk > > Interesting. awk is linked to gawk. That means there is an issue with > the man pages [...] gawk is built from the vanilla upstream sources. I agree that it's kind of weird t

RE: No manual entry for awk

2011-01-20 Thread Bill Ross
> Just a heads-up: I expect that few, if any, people on this list find your > observation interesting, and fewer, if any, will think it an issue. (Or > is it the other way around?) Since you do, I'd suggest that you consider > looking over the documentation; doing so may save you a lot of >"int