Do we still have those? I think it was common in late '90s, due to GNU trying to get `info` gain moment but nowadays?

Mostly just the bash builtins have (had) this problem.

But its also true that many, many man pages have extremely valuable information that no enterprising hacker should overlook, too ..

I was never able to properly parse large man pages, I'm so happy that llms can now prepare half a usable command without spending an hour reading a time without a single usage example.

What I usually do when I have to read large man pages like bash(1) is I read them as PDFs:

man -Tpdf bash | zathura -

Replace zathura with any PDF viewer reading from stdin or just save the PDF. Hope that can be useful to someone!

my manpager is `vim -`, can't beat that

You probably can — by using neovim:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Neovim#Use_as_a_pager

https://neovim.io/doc/user/filetype/#_man

I've also been running (neo)vim as a manpager. You get the same features as with vim (like easily copying text or opening referenced files/other manpages without using the mouse), but neovim also parses the page and creates a table of contents, which can be used for navigation within the page. It doesn't always work perfectly, but is usually better than nothing.

`tldr` is also great. It's essentially a collection of example invocations of *nix commands.

TIL that what I have wanted in manpages for years exists. Thank you!

tldr is so good, i wish it was a part of the os the same way manpages are just to help out newcomers

The real jackpot is if they're the same as the --help command

I used to think this and used things like `help2man`. I now disagree, but throwing it out there.

I could use some "help2man." I don't know how to "man" /s

Most people just discount man pages as unreadable and don’t even try to understand them.

Case in point: the jq man page is incredible and everyone I know instead runs off to google or stackoverflow or Claude to answer simple questions