question about perl man sections

[gregor herrmann]

On Wed, 08 Oct 2014 12:58:51 +0200, Axel Beckert wrote:

> Alexandre Detiste wrote:
> > I'm currently reviewing the package cruft[1], that compare
> > the status of files registred in dpkg/alternatives/diversions 
> > with what is actually present; and I bug on this;
> > 
> > Is it ok that one version of config_data man page is in section "1p"
> > and the other in section "1" ?
> 
> Seems quite common, yes:
> 
> → ls -l /usr/share/man/man1/*.1p.gz | wc -l
> 171
> 
> on my Wheezy workstation.
> 
> At least 3pm (which is IMHO the same kind of scheme) is very common:
> 
> → ls -l /usr/share/man/man3/*.3pm.gz | wc -l
> 5578
> 
> :-)

And the reasons are:

1) Debian Perl Policy, 4.1
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/perl-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-vendor_dirs
"Module packages must install manual pages into the standard
directories (see Documentation, Section 2.4) using the extensions .1p
and .3pm to ensure that no conflict arises where a packaged module
duplicates a core module."

2) Technically I _seem_ to remember that the common build tools (EUMM,
M::B) are patched to create .1p and .3pm extensions by default.

Cheers,
gregor

-- 
 .''`.  Homepage: http://info.comodo.priv.at/ - OpenPGP key 0xBB3A68018649AA06
 : :' : Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, and developer  -  http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'  Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-   BOFH excuse #125:  we just switched to Sprint.