[426] in SIPB bug reports
/usr/sipb/*bin/man
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Mar 23 20:54:07 1989
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 20:54:34 EST
From: Jonathan I. Kamens <jik@Athena.MIT.EDU>
To: epeisach@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
Cc: bug-sipb@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <epeisach@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>'s message of Thu, 23 Mar 89 20:48:41 EST <8903240148.AA11150@ODIE.MIT.EDU>
From: <epeisach@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 89 20:48:41 EST
As a side note, regardless of whatever method you choose to implement to
inform people to set their MANPATH, is there also reason at the same
time to inform people that they can now put /usr/sipb later in their
path? I vaguely remember the argument for placing sipb at the head was
to get the latest man pages. With latex and discuss going in the 6.1x
release, wouldn't you want users to use the rvd copies instead or am I
overlooking something?
Ezra
Release man pages only get updated at release time. Our man pages get
updated whenever we update our software, and our software gets updated
more often as well.
It is entire possible/probably that we will continue to provide
discuss, latex, xdvi, etc. in our locker even after it is in the
release. In that situation, I would think that the sipb bindir and
mandir should be before others in paths because that way users always
get the most up-to-date software, which quite possibly will not be the
software in the release.
Of course, there's an advantage to using the binaries on the RVD's --
they'll probably load quite a bit faster.
jik
