Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2016
James E Keenan writes: > On Wed Apr 27 22:11:35 2016, voegelas wrote: > > When mandoc is installed instead of the traditional man package one of > > the tests in perl5db.t fails with the error message below. With the > > attached patch the output of both man implementations is accepted. > > > > lib/perl5db ................................................... > > # Failed test 120 - perldoc command works fine at ../lib/perl5db.t line 2769 > > # got 'man: No entry for perlrules in the manual. > > # ' > > # expected /(?^:No manual entry for perlrules)/ > > FAILED at test 120 > You say "instead of". Since I have 'man' installed, if I were to install 'mandoc' how would I be able to trick the test into thinking that 'man' was not installed? The test in perl5db.t uses /usr/bin/man. /usr/bin/man is either provided by the traditional man package or by the mandoc package. The traditional man program outputs "No manual entry for perlrules". The man program from mandoc outputs "No entry for perlrules in the manual". There may be Linux distributions that provide a mandoc package that does not replace /usr/bin/man and that can be installed in parallel to the man package. But there are mandoc packages that fully replace the traditional man package. It's similar to the vi command, which may be provided by vim, elvis, nvi etc. on Linux.