* Bill Allombert <[email protected]> [200504 12:42]: > reopen 530011 > quit > > From: Chris Hofstaedtler <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: Bug#530011: util-linux: setarch man page is deficient > > User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 > > > > * Bill Allombert <[email protected]> [200503 22:31]: > > > setarch man page is deficient in many ways: > > Hello Chris, > > You forget to CC me while closing this bug. > Bug submitters must always be CCed since they do not receive > mail to [email protected], only the maintainer does.
While your second statement is correct, I did not forget to CC you, because I mailed xxx-done@. https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#closing clearly says that messages to xxx-done@ also get sent to the submitter, therefore you. > > > 1) the SYNOPSYS is broken: > > > SYNOPSIS > > > setarch <arch> [options] [program [arguments]] > > > > > > arch [options] [program [arguments]] > > > > > > why is there an "arch" line ? > > > > "arch" refers to a number of aliases, incl. linux32/linux64 as you > > mentioned below. But also i686, s390, ppc64le and what have you. > > This generic "arch" trick probably avoids listing all variants > > and/or having arch-specific manual pages. > > Thanks for the explanation! > > This should be explained and clarified in the manpage. > arch is typeset in the same way as setarch, so the reader > expects this to refer to /usr/bin/arch, but this is not the case. > /usr/bin/arch is provided by coreutils and is unrelated to setarch, > and has different options. > Instead it should refer to linux32/linux64 and state other > aliases might exist. Probably. Do you care enough to send a patch to upstream? That would greatly help with getting this done. Thanks, Chris
