[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: info -f does not ignore ./
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: info -f does not ignore ./ |
Date: |
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:27:09 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5 |
Eli Zaretskii cited:
> If FILENAME is an absolute file name, or begins with `./' or
> `../', Info looks for FILENAME only in the directory of the
> specified FILENAME, and adds the directory of FILENAME to the
> value of `INFOPATH'. In contrast, if FILENAME is in the form of a
> relative file name, but without the `./' or `../' prefix, Info
> will only look for it in the directories specified in `INFOPATH'.
> In other words, Info does _not_ treat file names which lack `./'
> and `../' prefix as relative to the current directory
'info' is the only program to treat pathnames this way. It therefore doesn't
matches the expectations of a normal user.
> > I would classify 1) and 3) as bugs.
>
> No, it's an intended feature.
Then, can you please provide another option which will take a FILENAME
and have 'info' use the specified FILENAME, also looking for FILENAME.info,
FILENAME.gz, FILENAME.info.gz, and *not* looking in other directories than
`dirname FILENAME` ? That would be handy.
Bruno
- info -f does not ignore ./, Bruno Haible, 2005/03/07
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Karl Berry, 2005/03/07
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Eli Zaretskii, 2005/03/07
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Karl Berry, 2005/03/07
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Bruno Haible, 2005/03/08
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Karl Berry, 2005/03/08
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Bruno Haible, 2005/03/08
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Eli Zaretskii, 2005/03/08
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Karl Berry, 2005/03/08
- the "info" command, Stepan Kasal, 2005/03/09
- Re: the "info" command, Eli Zaretskii, 2005/03/09
- Re: the "info" command, Karl Berry, 2005/03/10
- Re: info -f does not ignore ./, Eli Zaretskii, 2005/03/08