Re: umask has no man page?
2014/11/02 11:19 "Carl Fink" <carl@finknetwork.com>:
>
> When I wanted the options for umask, I typed 'man umask' and got the man
> page for it as a C header diretive? (I'm not a C programmer, but it seemed
> to be for C header files and came from section 2.)
>
> This is darn confusing for a new user. I have been around long enough
> (slink) that I quickly realized it must be a Bash builtin and found that man
> page, but how would a beginner know that? Surely a symbolic link could be
> set up for umask as well as the others (bg, eval, fg, read, etc.)?
>
> Should I file this as a bug against Sid? I know there's no chance it will
> make it into Wheezy.
> --
> Carl Fink nitpicking@nitpicking.com
Hmm. What do I get when I try to do a man umask?
BASH_BUILTINS (1)
I wonder why. I have a memory of doing something like installing a
manpages package, but I'm not sure that was what did the trick, or it
might have been mingw I did that on.
Wheezy, FWIW.
(And thanks to The Wanderer for reminding us about the help command. I
keep forgetting that.)
--
Joel Rees
Reply to: