| All Forums |
Register |
Login |
Search |
Subscriptions |
My Profile |
Inbox |
| Tool Warehouse |
FAQs |
Resources |
Help |
Member List |
Address Book |
Logout |
|
|
xman alternative
|
Logged in as: Guest |
| Users viewing this topic: none |
|
Login  |
|
|
 xman alternative - Sep. 16, '04, 5:16:52 PM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
Does anbybody know any alternative to xman? Something more convinient and ergonomical to use and with more nicer look?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 27, '04, 9:32:10 AM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
I found- there is a tool called tkman which can be easily used in interix with tcl and tk packages installed and an x server of course. If you feel interested I can submit it packaged.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 28, '04, 1:12:31 AM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
Hey that looks pretty cool. It supports both man pages and texinfo. Nifty annotation feature. Lot's of other features.
I vote that you package it and send it in. Good on ya!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 28, '04, 2:13:54 AM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
I've packaged it as well as Rosseta-man which is reqired for it to run. I've uploaded the packages to the ftp for tests. They seem to be fine but'm not sure if I haven't missed any dependancy. I don't have the X server on my testing machine. If Rodney could move the packages to the /beta folder you could have a try.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 28, '04, 2:21:17 AM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
Cygwin/X is an XFree86 implementation for Win32 written using DirectX. If the reason you don't have the X server on your dev machine is money, you should give it a try.
You can get it to start in a multi-window mode like the OS X X server:
C:\cygwin\usr\X11R6\bin\run.exe XWin -multiwindow -clipboard -emulate3buttons
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 28, '04, 4:21:21 AM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
The reason is rather that the second machine is in the office and I didn't inslall the X server. At home I have the X server. The tkman is surely dependant on the tcl/tk but I'm not sure if any others. Probably not.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Sep. 29, '04, 8:07:36 AM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
The corrected version or PolyglotMan tool has been uploaded, the rman-3.2-1.1-bin package has corrected dependancy to properly read attached manpage.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 10, '04, 10:13:37 PM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
OK. I got TkMan installed and running. I appear to have a LOT of "stray cats". Also it reports incorectly that I don't haven't got any 'whatis' files.
quote:
Problems in component paths of MANPATH environment variable...
/usr/local/share/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
=> generate `whatis' with mkwhatis/makewhatis/catman
/usr/local/ssl/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
/usr/local/qt/man -- doesn't exist
/usr/local/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
/usr/share/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
/usr/X11R6/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
/usr/X11R5/man -- no `whatis' file for apropos
However all of these directories (except /usr/local/qt/man) have whatis.db files. And furthermore apropos works from a shell prompt. Even weirder the Apropos searches actually work! So I guess this is a bug.
However, all that said, it is still very useful.
< Message edited by breiter -- Oct. 10, '04, 10:56:00 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 10, '04, 10:44:59 PM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
Oh. One more observation. There's a bit of a naming issue with the rman package internally and as referenced by tkman as a dependency. Here's what I'm getting at:
The file name for the rman package is "rman-3.2-1.1-bin35.tgz". But the pkg name that it registers is "rman-3.2-1.1-bin". So the package file name should really by "rman-3.2-1.1-bin.tgz".
Now, in the tkman package you declare a dependency on "rman-3.2-1.0-bin" Infortunately "rman-3.2-1.0-bin" != "rman-3.2-1.1-bin". So the only way to get the package to install now is to use pkg_add -f to force the installation.
This brings up a bit of an issue with pkg_add in general. It doesn't fail over very gracefully when you have newer packages than dependecies that are declared. This made it really a pain for me to isntall, GIMP, for instance where there were so many dependencies but the *-current-bin.tgz versions were often newer than the ones declared on the GIMP package. It would be very nice if pkg_add had an option to ingnore down-level dependencies or to prompt the user interactively to do so.
One final thing. I'm not sure about the numbering convention you are using with the packaging version appended to the version number of the software. I don't find any standards defined in pkg_craeate(1). But I have noticed that Rodney tends to rename anything that I create that isn't named N.N.N-bin.tgz.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 11, '04, 12:48:57 AM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
Yes, there is a standard for the version numbering.
From the pkg_create man page:
@name name
Set the name of the package. This is mandatory and is usually
put at the top. This name is potentially different than the name
of the file it came in, and is used when keeping track of the
package for later deinstallation. Note that pkg_create will
derive this field from the package name and add it automatically
if none is given. The name consists of three parts: application,
version and type. This helps standardize names which makes it
easier for users, packagers and the installer. The three parts
are separated by a single "-". Application may be any alphanu-
merical characters. The type should currently be set as "bin" for
binary. Other types may be added in the future and will be listed
here when available. Version specifies the version of the pack-
age. The version chosen may be, and likely should be, reflective
of the application's version number. The version number may have
up to six parts. Each part may be either a digital number
between 0 and 1023, or a lower case letter from 'a' through 'z'
inclusive. Each digit must be separated with a "." to distinguish
each sub-part of the version number. The alphabet versions can
immediately follow a digit (no "."), but alphabet parts must be
separated by a "." to distinguish subparts. Unknown characters
will be treated as a "1". Examples:
@name canary-1.0-bin
@name mammal-4.22.3b-bin
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 11, '04, 12:55:39 AM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
quote:
The file name for the rman package is "rman-3.2-1.1-bin35.tgz". But the pkg name that it registers is "rman-3.2-1.1-bin". So the package file name should really by "rman-3.2-1.1-bin.tgz".
Actually this is a non-problem. The internal "@name" always wins.
Once move out of beta we can standardize the filename; that's easy enough.
> Now, in the tkman package you declare...
Yeah, it's the misplaced "-" (dash) in the rman name's "version zone". The
dash should be changed to a dot (.). That'll clear things up a lot.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 11, '04, 2:12:48 AM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
Wouldn't it be jus enouch to change the filename into *-bin ??
I don't actually remember but I thought that it correctlt installed the rman as a dependency when I was testing it...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 13, '04, 1:33:49 PM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
I like it, too. Except for the startup warnings that I mentioned earlier. (They are a little anoying but seem safe to ignore.) Nobody else mentioned them, so maybe I'm doing something wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 25, '04, 8:42:47 AM
|
|
|
breiter
Posts: 346
Joined: Jun. 14, '04,
From: Washington, DC
Status: offline
|
Gregorio,
Thanks for digging up TkMan and getting it working. It's simply great. Very useful. I hope Rodney gets a chance to publish it to the Warehouse soon.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 25, '04, 11:52:22 AM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
It's 3rd in line of things "to do" today (well, not counting e-mail & the forum).
FYI.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 25, '04, 2:38:32 PM
|
|
|
cortez_
Posts: 330
Joined: Mar. 27, '04,
From: Poland
Status: offline
|
I've got the same stray cats but I just ignore them. The most important functionality is the browsing of manpages.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: xman alternative - Oct. 26, '04, 11:49:51 AM
|
|
|
Rodney
Posts: 3728
Joined: Jul. 9, '02,
From: /Tools lab
Status: offline
|
Okay, just FYI. I'm at the point of reviewing tkman.
Tkman depends on a several packages. So there are a couple of
packages to add the the dependency list (such as the /Tools grep
since it has zgrep and SFU as shipped doesn't). This is no great
worry, pretty minor adjustment. But I have to get the rman package
reviewed first (cart and horse routine); most of rman changes have
been discussed at this point in the forum I believe, but I'm "formally"
look at it now.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
|
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
Printable Version
I agree completely with Brian Reiter. Basic dependencies are taken