...

...

...

...

"Karl" == Karl Berry writes:

Well, if you can make a patch for the texdoc .dat file, I can install it :).

I fear that, unlike texdoctk, texdoc simply uses ls-R as a database. Thomas recently mentioned that one can define aliases, but I think that it is best if the authors provide fixes. Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-4592165 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:reinhard.kotucha@web.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quoting Reinhard Kotucha :

...

...

...

...

...

"Karl" == Karl Berry writes:

...

Well, if you can make a patch for the texdoc .dat file, I can install it :).

I fear that, unlike texdoctk, texdoc simply uses ls-R as a database.

Thomas recently mentioned that one can define aliases, but I think that it is best if the authors provide fixes.

It may be best, but is it practical? Will aliases help when you have dozens of manual.pdf files? I suspect it is much easier to make changes in texdoc to support "package/manual". On systems that support symlinks one could process the doc tree to make package/manual.pdf -> package/package.pdf. -- George N. White III Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia

...

...

...

...

"Heiko" == Heiko Oberdiek writes:

And how you want to solve the problem of several documentation files? One symlink can point to just *one* file.

I do not claim that "mv manual.pdf hyperref.pdf" solves all problems. But it is better than what we have now. If there are more files, names like hyperref-example.pdf would not be bad. They can be remembered easily. But the main problem is that the name "manual.pdf" is not unique. But the main doc file should have a name which people expext. TeXLive will be released in a few days, so we certainly will not be able to have a perfect solution, but I think that "mv manual.pdf hyperref.pdf" is a significant improvement. Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-4592165 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:reinhard.kotucha@web.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

...

...

...

...

"Heiko" == Heiko Oberdiek writes:

hyperref.pdf is the document, generated from hyperref.dtx. Thus this solution leads to confusion.

There is no file hyperref.pdf in TeXLive or teTeX. Karl? Thomas? Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-4592165 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:reinhard.kotucha@web.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Kastrup wrote:

Reinhard Kotucha writes:

...

is it possible to make documentation for pdftex and hyperref accessible to texdoc(1)?

While the pdftex manual can be accessed if people know that it is called "pdftex-a" (it sounds like a joke if people say "Read the documentation" on a mailing list), the hyperref manual is inaccessible.

On my system I get:

$ locate manual.pdf | wc -l 164

Is it possible to solve it before TL is released?

texdoc hyperref/manual

Or, if you don't know that by heart, texdoc -s hyperref texdoc hyperref/manual

...

I would expect that "texdoc <packagename>" or "texdoc <progname>" provides something useful.

Seems desirable.

Heiko Oberdiek (hyperref's maintainer) argued that there is not one piece of documentation for hyperref, and therefore there's no good solution as to what "texdoc hyperref" should show. The other documents are not only developers' information, there's also some interesting user docs in there (especially but not only in README), and a real solution would require to rewrite the manual (which is outdated, anyway). I'm sure he welcomes offers for help; I myself have done that once and have the sources for the docs on my system, but in fact I never found time. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer