Re: 2.6beta10 - a users comment.

[Richard Coleman <coleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> >   o Split man pages. I know this is religious but the multiple sections
> >     are not convenient (for me) to use at all. In days of yore i could simply
> >     'man zsh' and then search back and forward for what I needed to my
> >     little heart's content. Now I need to first remember the name of
> >     the 5 sections and work with them all.

Yes, but unfortunately the man pages are weighing in at about 90
pages now.  The split was necessary to make them maintainable since
I'm planning on adding more detail to various sections. My intentions
since I made the split were to supply both split versions and a single
mega-manpage.  I just haven't gotten around to it yet.

> Richard: could we supply the something like the following zshall page
> as well?  That would fix the problem without keeping multiple copies.
> It's just the zsh page with some .so's added:  unfortunately, .so
> appears to be botched so that you have to specify the full pathname,
> so that the /usr/local's I've put in should really be whatever
> --prefix is given to configure.  (You can only put man1/zshmisc.1
> etc. in the first line of a manual entry, it seems.  This is
> typical of nroff which is surely the product of a deranged mind.)

Hmm... my vague plan was to have some type of perl script that created
a mega-manpage out of the pieces, but if this works, then this would
be easier.  Maybe use a simple sed script to put in the right path
names in zshall.1.

rc