Web lists-archives.com

Re: Online copies of textinfo content available?

On Sat 27 Oct 2018 at 09:19:15 (+0100), mick crane wrote:
> On 2018-10-26 19:17, Brian wrote:
>  >     {plain text fine --  HTML *NOT* needed} is MUCH more functional.
> > > 
> > > Agreed, a good man page is the best. I've no clue why there
> > > seems to be
> > > an aversion to a man page that has to be scrolled to read it
> > > all. All of
> > > us have up/down arrows on our keyboards, and 99% have a mouse
> > > wheel, so
> > > there is no excuse that holds water to not put it all in the man
> > > page. "man bash" if you man page authors want to see what a real man
> > > page looks like.
> > 
> > An excellent man page. Intended for masochists and those who have all
> > the time in the world to read and absorb it. :)
> I made the mistake of printing out man bash once. It's really, really long

Some of the longer man pages (eg bash, fvwm, video programs) are
rather unmanageable when just presented as flat text, even when
coloured, but I find this line useful for generating a little
library of PDFs that are much easier to skim through with your
favourite viewer:

$ man -t foo | ps2pdf - - > path-to-your-library/foo.pdf

But perhaps don't print them (on paper)! Some run to well over 100 pages.

Where there's a Texinfo source available, there may be a better method
via TeX. Anyone?