RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > Hi, Haai, "Ingo Schwarze" wrote: > just FYI: > > zeurk...@volny.cz wrote on Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 08:10:10PM +0100: >> jmc@ wrote: > >>> Dq produces "", so use either Dq or "". > >> Medoes it for consistency with cases like: >> >> .Vt "struct blaat" Va scaahp Ns Ic ";" >> >> where the quotes are part of the invocation syntax. > > Not really. > > The arguments of .Vt almost never need quoting, not even if there > are other macros before or after it on the same input line. *shrugs* To me, there is a real difference between "struct blaat" and "struct" "blaat" (the latter would imply two separate types), but obviously YMDV :) In fact, it's an old peeve of mine that even when quoting the arguments, the underlining in the output is not applied to the spaces. > The usual way to quote punctuation is by prepending a zero-width > space, so if you really wanted to talk about a command called ";", > you would write: .Ic \&; Me'll give that some thought, although me'll already argue that ";" is (to me) a little more readable. > But such a command would be weirdly named indeed, and appending > an internal command to a variable name would make no sense either. Well, what do you suggest? Just include C syntax elements as plain text? > If "scaahp" is a global variable, the best way to mention it is > simply > > .Vt struct blaat scaahp ; Except that scaahp is not a type, not a syntax element, but a variable: we have Va for that. > as documented in the mdoc(7) manual: > > https://man.openbsd.org/mdoc.7#Vt_2 Interesting. It would appear that both and Va and Vt have the capacity for conflating type and variable names. Unless me's seriously mistaken: the whole point of mdoc(7) is to not do that kind of thing anymore. > Note that the trailing semicolon is just punctuation, so it is > actually important to *not* escape or quote it. You suggest depending on the overlap between C and roff to handle the semicolon properly? Or is memissing something? > The forms > > .Va struct blaat scaahp ; > .Vt struct blaat Va scaahp ; > > are also acceptable albeit less common. > No quoting or escaping either way... Strange, this would really seem to fly in the face of the idea behind mdoc(7). > Quoting with "" *is* needed in cases where it matters that two words > are kept together in a single macro argument even though there is > a space character between them in the source: > > .Sh SYNOPSIS > .Ft double > .Fn sin "double x" > > But that certainly isn't needed for .Vt. Relatively few macros > care, most prominently .Fa and .Fn. Yet they might care one day. What if someone'd decide to make variable type names appear in a different way from the variable names themselves? Me'd hate the poor sod having to fix lots of manual pages *just* to get a trivial change in the pretty-printing to work correctly. It would make sense to presume that, when mdoc(7) was still new, the implications of moving away from the "as long as it looks good on my terminal" approach hadn't completely sunk in yet. But as it'll be 2020 in a matter of days, we really ought to either honor its basic ideas, or come up with something better. The latter could take the form of a generic C pretty-printer that can be called as a roff macro, and produces roff output. > Yours, > Ingo Baai, --zeurkous. -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
Hi, just FYI: zeurk...@volny.cz wrote on Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 08:10:10PM +0100: > jmc@ wrote: >> Dq produces "", so use either Dq or "". > Medoes it for consistency with cases like: > > .Vt "struct blaat" Va scaahp Ns Ic ";" > > where the quotes are part of the invocation syntax. Not really. The arguments of .Vt almost never need quoting, not even if there are other macros before or after it on the same input line. The usual way to quote punctuation is by prepending a zero-width space, so if you really wanted to talk about a command called ";", you would write: .Ic \&; But such a command would be weirdly named indeed, and appending an internal command to a variable name would make no sense either. If "scaahp" is a global variable, the best way to mention it is simply .Vt struct blaat scaahp ; as documented in the mdoc(7) manual: https://man.openbsd.org/mdoc.7#Vt_2 Note that the trailing semicolon is just punctuation, so it is actually important to *not* escape or quote it. The forms .Va struct blaat scaahp ; .Vt struct blaat Va scaahp ; are also acceptable albeit less common. No quoting or escaping either way... Quoting with "" *is* needed in cases where it matters that two words are kept together in a single macro argument even though there is a space character between them in the source: .Sh SYNOPSIS .Ft double .Fn sin "double x" But that certainly isn't needed for .Vt. Relatively few macros care, most prominently .Fa and .Fn. Yours, Ingo
RE: RE: RE: RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] theo wrote: > wrote: > >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> theo wrote: >> > wrote: >> > >> >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> >> >> theo wrote: >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> >> >> >> >> "Jason McIntyre" wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is >> >> >> > only >> >> >> > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online >> >> >> > fails >> >> >> > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. >> >> >> >> >> >> Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) >> >> >> chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... >> >> > >> >> > How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones >> >> > which look identical in the box. And your description might not >> >> > differentiate >> >> > between them! >> >> >> >> It does, however, constitute a hint that all might not be what it seems. >> > >> > No, because you've been too precis and claim others don't exist. >> >> Menever made that claim. Indeed, meput the double qotes there to signify >> a *lack* of precision (thought merealizes not everyone might understand >> that meaning). > > i'm out of arguments so i think i'll stamp on the floor FTFY. --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
wrote: > [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > > theo wrote: > > wrote: > > > >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > >> > >> theo wrote: > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > >> >> > >> >> "Jason McIntyre" wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is > >> >> > only > >> >> > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online > >> >> > fails > >> >> > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. > >> >> > >> >> Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) > >> >> chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... > >> > > >> > How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones > >> > which look identical in the box. And your description might not > >> > differentiate > >> > between them! > >> > >> It does, however, constitute a hint that all might not be what it seems. > > > > No, because you've been too precis and claim others don't exist. > > Menever made that claim. Indeed, meput the double qotes there to signify > a *lack* of precision (thought merealizes not everyone might understand > that meaning). what a bunch of garbage
RE: RE: RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] theo wrote: > wrote: > >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> theo wrote: >> > wrote: >> > >> >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> >> >> "Jason McIntyre" wrote: >> >> > >> >> > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only >> >> > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails >> >> > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. >> >> >> >> Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) >> >> chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... >> > >> > How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones >> > which look identical in the box. And your description might not >> > differentiate >> > between them! >> >> It does, however, constitute a hint that all might not be what it seems. > > No, because you've been too precis and claim others don't exist. Menever made that claim. Indeed, meput the double qotes there to signify a *lack* of precision (thought merealizes not everyone might understand that meaning). --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
wrote: > [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > > theo wrote: > > wrote: > > > >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > >> > >> "Jason McIntyre" wrote: > >> > > >> > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only > >> > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails > >> > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. > >> > >> Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) > >> chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... > > > > How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones > > which look identical in the box. And your description might not > > differentiate > > between them! > > It does, however, constitute a hint that all might not be what it seems. No, because you've been too precis and claim others don't exist.
RE: RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] theo wrote: > wrote: > >> [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] >> >> "Jason McIntyre" wrote: >> > >> > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only >> > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails >> > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. >> >> Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) >> chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... > > How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones > which look identical in the box. And your description might not differentiate > between them! It does, however, constitute a hint that all might not be what it seems. > The point is our manual pages cannot be overly exact and proscriptive when > we aren't in position of 100% of the facts. Of course -- mehas no objection to leaving it out. --zeur. -- Friggin' Machines!
RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 06:12:12PM +, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > i committed this without the asix chipset part. Thanks! > for future reference: >[snip] >> > .\" >> > -.Dd $Mdocdate: July 16 2013 $ >> > +.Dd $Mdocdate: December 17 2019 $ > > don;t bump Mdocdate. it updates on commit. Oh, sorry, meupdated a ton of nnx man pages in the past few days and is still kind of in the flow =) > Dq produces "", so use either Dq or "". Medoes it for consistency with cases like: .Vt "struct blaat" Va scaahp Ns Ic ";" where the quotes are part of the invocation syntax. --zeurkous. > jmc -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
wrote: > [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > > "Jason McIntyre" wrote: > > > > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only > > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails > > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. > > Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) > chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... How true. Except there might also be two completely difference ones which look identical in the box. And your description might not differentiate between them! The point is our manual pages cannot be overly exact and proscriptive when we aren't in position of 100% of the facts.
RE: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] "Jason McIntyre" wrote: > > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. Dunno, there might well be a "plain" version with another (unspecified) chipset, in which case we'd be confusing people... > unless you have any more info, i guess we could commit without that > part. Up to you :) --zeur. > > jmc -- Friggin' Machines!
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 06:12:12PM +, Jason McIntyre wrote: i committed this without the asix chipset part. for future reference: > > > > Index: src/share/man/man4/axe.4 > > === > > RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v > > retrieving revision 1.45 > > diff -u -p -u -r1.45 axe.4 > > --- src/share/man/man4/axe.416 Jul 2013 16:05:48 - 1.45 > > +++ src/share/man/man4/axe.417 Dec 2019 11:20:12 - > > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ > > .\" $FreeBSD: /repoman/r/ncvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v 1.3 2003/05/29 > > 21:28:35 ru Exp $ > > .\" $OpenBSD: axe.4,v 1.45 2013/07/16 16:05:48 schwarze Exp $ > > .\" > > -.Dd $Mdocdate: July 16 2013 $ > > +.Dd $Mdocdate: December 17 2019 $ don;t bump Mdocdate. it updates on commit. > > .Dt AXE 4 > > .Os > > .Sh NAME > > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ following: > > .It Buffalo(MELCO) LUA-U2-KTX > > .It Corega FEther USB2-TX > > .It D-Link DUB-E100 > > +.It Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, Dq "ASIX chipset" Dq produces "", so use either Dq or "". jmc > > .It Good Way GWUSB2E > > .It Hawking UF200 > > .It Intellinet USB 2.0 to Ethernet (rev A) > > > > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only > for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails > to turn up such a model with a different chipset. > > unless you have any more info, i guess we could commit without that > part. > > jmc
Re: axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:30:17PM +0100, zeurk...@volny.cz wrote: > [not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] > > Haai, > > Mewas actually looking for a Cardbus adapter, but availability issues > made me have to go with USB again... at least it works :) > > > axe0 at uhub0 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 "ASIX Electronics AX88178" > > rev 2.00/0.01 addr 2 > > axe0: AX88178, address XX:CE:NS:OR:ED:XX > > rgephy0 at axe0 phy 1: RTL8169S/8110S/8211 PHY, rev. 2 > > The box only specifies "ASIX chipset", but after studying the manual > pages, it did make me take the plunge. Given that most manufacturers > apparently refuse to specify even that much, mesupposes we're lucky in > this case... > > ...manual patch below. > > --zeurkous. > > Index: src/share/man/man4/axe.4 > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v > retrieving revision 1.45 > diff -u -p -u -r1.45 axe.4 > --- src/share/man/man4/axe.4 16 Jul 2013 16:05:48 - 1.45 > +++ src/share/man/man4/axe.4 17 Dec 2019 11:20:12 - > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ > .\" $FreeBSD: /repoman/r/ncvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v 1.3 2003/05/29 > 21:28:35 ru Exp $ > .\" $OpenBSD: axe.4,v 1.45 2013/07/16 16:05:48 schwarze Exp $ > .\" > -.Dd $Mdocdate: July 16 2013 $ > +.Dd $Mdocdate: December 17 2019 $ > .Dt AXE 4 > .Os > .Sh NAME > @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ following: > .It Buffalo(MELCO) LUA-U2-KTX > .It Corega FEther USB2-TX > .It D-Link DUB-E100 > +.It Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, Dq "ASIX chipset" > .It Good Way GWUSB2E > .It Hawking UF200 > .It Intellinet USB 2.0 to Ethernet (rev A) > hi. the "asix chipset" bit seems unneccessary, since the driver is only for asix chips (as far as i can tell) and quickly skimming online fails to turn up such a model with a different chipset. unless you have any more info, i guess we could commit without that part. jmc
axe(4) success with 'Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, "ASIX chipset"' (w/ manual patch)
[not subscribed, please Cc, thanks.] Haai, Mewas actually looking for a Cardbus adapter, but availability issues made me have to go with USB again... at least it works :) > axe0 at uhub0 port 2 configuration 1 interface 0 "ASIX Electronics AX88178" > rev 2.00/0.01 addr 2 > axe0: AX88178, address XX:CE:NS:OR:ED:XX > rgephy0 at axe0 phy 1: RTL8169S/8110S/8211 PHY, rev. 2 The box only specifies "ASIX chipset", but after studying the manual pages, it did make me take the plunge. Given that most manufacturers apparently refuse to specify even that much, mesupposes we're lucky in this case... ...manual patch below. --zeurkous. Index: src/share/man/man4/axe.4 === RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v retrieving revision 1.45 diff -u -p -u -r1.45 axe.4 --- src/share/man/man4/axe.416 Jul 2013 16:05:48 - 1.45 +++ src/share/man/man4/axe.417 Dec 2019 11:20:12 - @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ .\" $FreeBSD: /repoman/r/ncvs/src/share/man/man4/axe.4,v 1.3 2003/05/29 21:28:35 ru Exp $ .\" $OpenBSD: axe.4,v 1.45 2013/07/16 16:05:48 schwarze Exp $ .\" -.Dd $Mdocdate: July 16 2013 $ +.Dd $Mdocdate: December 17 2019 $ .Dt AXE 4 .Os .Sh NAME @@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ following: .It Buffalo(MELCO) LUA-U2-KTX .It Corega FEther USB2-TX .It D-Link DUB-E100 +.It Delock Gigabit USB 2.0 Ethernet Adapter, Dq "ASIX chipset" .It Good Way GWUSB2E .It Hawking UF200 .It Intellinet USB 2.0 to Ethernet (rev A)
