Re: [Nmh-workers] New mh-mime(7) man page

[Ken Hornstein]

>Playing devil's advocate...

I do appreciate the feedback!

>    Character set conversion will only take place if nmh was built with
>    icov(3) support.
>
>"iconv".  State how I can determine if this was the case given a binary
>installation?  I'm hoping there's a switch on a command or similar that
>prints the build configuration.

Right now there is nothing.  Autoconf will always try to compile in
iconv support if we can find it; it's not a user-selectable option.
I'm not sure what the right mechanism is to expose this.  Well, I see that
mhparam exposes stuff lock the locking mechanism, version number, and
TLS/SASL support.  Looks like a good thing to add there.

>    In this case a substitution character will be used for the
>    characters that cannot be converted.
>
>It's always the same character used for all ones that couldn't be
>converted?  Or does it mean turning “” into ""?

Weeell … I didn't want to get TOO specific, but since you asked … it's
not always the same character.  Specifically, if it's a filename (like
the Content-Disposition "filename" parameter) it gets converted to an
underscore, because '?' seemed like a lousy default substitution character
in that particular case since it matches a shell wildcard.  But '?' in
that parameter still ends up as a '?', so maybe that's not a valid
concern.  Anyway, more detail than I had intended for this man page.
This was intended as an overview rather than explicit detail; if people
think this is appropriate here rather than in command-specific man pages,
I'd be open to changing that.

>s/conjuction/conjunction/.  I'm more used to the convention where the
>first time a command is mentioned it is by man page, e.g. "mhlist(1)
>will display...".  Afterwards, it's just "mhlist".  Then there is no
>need to say "See the... man page" as the reference, including section,
>has already been given.
>
>    See the send(1) man page for details...
>
>Likewise, it's "See send(1) for details".  The (1) convention means the
>reader knows it's a man page.

Fair enough, I went back and forth on that.  There is not a lot of
consistency I had to go on, but I think you're right and I'll change that.
However, what do people think about the first time a command is mentioned
to give a man page reference?

>    SEE ALSO
>        nmh(7), mhbuild(1), comp(1), repl(1), whatnow(1), mh-format(5)
>
>Missing full stop.

A period at the end of that list?  I looked, and no nmh man page has
one in a list like that.  Or did you mean something else?

Thank you for the feedback!  It is much appreciated.

--Ken