Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 11:36:34 -0800, Alistair Crooks wrote: > I find it better to have > > MAN+= bar.7 > MAN+= foo.7 > > Since a grep for 'MAN.*foo' will produce meaningful results Also good for diffs in the future, e.g. MAN += f.3 -MAN += g.3 MAN += h.3 vs. f.3 \ -g.3 \ h.3 \ Diff -p *might* do the helpful thing, but it gets confused sometimes. -uwe
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 18:09 Taylor R Campbell < campbell+netbsd-source-change...@mumble.net> wrote: > > Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 02:05:25 + > > From: Taylor R Campbell > > > > > Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 00:23:33 - (UTC) > > > From: chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) > > > > > > Yes, this is indeed a lot better. I prefer though: > > > > > > MAN+= \ > > > bar.7 \ > > > foo.7 > > > > > > It is faster to parse, involves less typing, whitespace is cleaner. > > > > This one doesn't have the same pattern for every line, so it makes > > merging and sorting harder -- do M-x sort-lines on the content lines, > > and you'll come up with: > > > > MAN+= \ > > foo.7 > > bar.7 \ > > err, obviously I meant this example the other way; if it had been > written as: > > MAN+= \ > foo.7 \ > bar.7 > > as the natural order of metasyntactic variables (foo, bar), then doing > M-x sort-lines on the content lines would yield: > > MAN+= \ > bar.7 > foo.7 \ I find it better to have MAN+= bar.7 MAN+= foo.7 Since a grep for 'MAN.*foo' will produce meaningful results Sorting, and initial entry are once-only operations, searching happens everywhere all the time. > > >
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 02:05:25 + > From: Taylor R Campbell > > > Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 00:23:33 - (UTC) > > From: chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) > > > > Yes, this is indeed a lot better. I prefer though: > > > > MAN+= \ > > bar.7 \ > > foo.7 > > > > It is faster to parse, involves less typing, whitespace is cleaner. > > This one doesn't have the same pattern for every line, so it makes > merging and sorting harder -- do M-x sort-lines on the content lines, > and you'll come up with: > > MAN+= \ > foo.7 > bar.7 \ err, obviously I meant this example the other way; if it had been written as: MAN+= \ foo.7 \ bar.7 as the natural order of metasyntactic variables (foo, bar), then doing M-x sort-lines on the content lines would yield: MAN+= \ bar.7 foo.7 \
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 00:23:33 - (UTC) > From: chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) > > Yes, this is indeed a lot better. I prefer though: > > MAN+= \ > bar.7 \ > foo.7 > > It is faster to parse, involves less typing, whitespace is cleaner. This one doesn't have the same pattern for every line, so it makes merging and sorting harder -- do M-x sort-lines on the content lines, and you'll come up with: MAN+= \ foo.7 bar.7 \ which does the wrong thing, and only if you're lucky will fail in an obvious way rather than just silently omitting some entries. In portable makefiles I usually write: MAN= \ bar.7 \ foo.7 \ # end of MAN so at least each line has the same pattern, making merging and sorting easier.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
In article <20231123211614.011a1f...@cvs.netbsd.org>, Taylor R Campbell wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >Module Name: src >Committed By: riastradh >Date: Thu Nov 23 21:16:13 UTC 2023 > >Modified Files: > src/share/man/man7: Makefile > >Log Message: >share/man/man7/Makefile: Split MAN on separate lines, and sort. > >Makes sorting and merging changes easier. > >No functional change intended. > >Preparing for a new stack(7) in the service of PR pkg/57708. Yes, this is indeed a lot better. I prefer though: MAN+= \ bar.7 \ foo.7 It is faster to parse, involves less typing, whitespace is cleaner. christos
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 07:13:44PM +0300, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote: > May be also drop "The number for SIGFOO is 666." from the text and > just change list tags to > > SIGFOO/666 - Foo > > also dropping the parens around the description? Sure, if you want to do that, you have my blessing :) Thomas
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 15:48:23 +, Thomas Klausner wrote: > Modified Files: > src/share/man/man7: signal.7 > > Log Message: > Add signal numbers in overview table. > They are already in the text, but this way they're easier to find. May be also drop "The number for SIGFOO is 666." from the text and just change list tags to SIGFOO/666 - Foo also dropping the parens around the description? -uwe
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 22:12:52 +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 02:19:13PM +0300, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote: > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:13:36 +, Thomas Klausner wrote: > > > > > Module Name: src > > > Committed By: wiz > > > Date: Tue May 15 09:13:36 UTC 2018 > > > > > > Modified Files: > > > src/share/man/man7: intro.7 > > > > > > Log Message: > > > Remove Tn. > > > > I wonder why we are doing this? .Tn is small caps in the PostScript > > output and it definitely looks better than all caps. > > mandoc warns about them, because it doesn't do anything with them. That is not a good argument. We just happen to use mandoc to quickly get formatted man pages. One can also use troff and real tmac.doc for that. The PostScript output of mandoc can be generously described as extremely primitive (as far as I can tell this is by design, so this is not an argument against mandoc). Will you also remove more markup b/c "mandoc doesn't do anything with it" compared to reall troff? > If you use them because they are small caps, it's a kind of a > misuse, because the point of mandoc is that you do semantic markup. That is not a good argument either. mdoc is not docbook that has gazillion hair splitting options for marking up content. Using markup with a rather broad intent is quite normal in mdoc, e.g (emphasis mine): Function Arguments The `.Fa' macro is used to refer to FUNCTION ARGUMENTS (parameters) outside of the SYNOPSIS section of the manual [...] `.Fa' may also be used to refer to STRUCTURE MEMBERS. > Tn has been used for lots of stuff, many of which are not > trademarks. The manual section that describes .Tn is called Trade Names (or Acronyms and Type Names) and the examples given are .Tn DECDEC .Tn ASCII ASCII and ASCII there gives a pretty obviout hint about the intent I think. And since you insist on the very literal interpretation of "Tn", consider your most recent change to remove markup from .Tn NFS. Funny thing is that my "NFS Illustrated" book begins with: The NFS(TM) protocol (hereafter simply called "NFS") ... Do you really want *that* level of pedantry? > Pick any of these :) Please, stop removing all instances of .Tn indiscriminately. Ideally, restore all the .Tn's you've alreay indisciminately removed. Since "mandoc doesn't do anything with it" it's not like we have to urgenly remove them to avoid unreadable or horribly mangled man pages. Please, don't destroy existing information. Even if some of that markup is wrong, the decision to remove it should be based on valid reasons. You are obviously doing it based on wrong premises. And then you don't even apply those consistently as the NFS example shows. :) Ok, I mentioned that last one just to hint at the absurdity of literal interpretation. Look at docbook. This is semantic markup taken to the extreme. Do we really want to head down that road? B/c there is docbook vocabulary for manual pages if we want it. So for now, please, just stop. -uwe
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 02:19:13PM +0300, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:13:36 +, Thomas Klausner wrote: > > > Module Name:src > > Committed By: wiz > > Date: Tue May 15 09:13:36 UTC 2018 > > > > Modified Files: > > src/share/man/man7: intro.7 > > > > Log Message: > > Remove Tn. > > I wonder why we are doing this? .Tn is small caps in the PostScript > output and it definitely looks better than all caps. mandoc warns about them, because it doesn't do anything with them. If you use them because they are small caps, it's a kind of a misuse, because the point of mandoc is that you do semantic markup. Tn has been used for lots of stuff, many of which are not trademarks. Pick any of these :) Thomas
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:13:36 +, Thomas Klausner wrote: > Module Name: src > Committed By: wiz > Date: Tue May 15 09:13:36 UTC 2018 > > Modified Files: > src/share/man/man7: intro.7 > > Log Message: > Remove Tn. I wonder why we are doing this? .Tn is small caps in the PostScript output and it definitely looks better than all caps. -uwe
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On May 6, 1:09pm, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: } On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:16:36AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote: } > Silly question, but why would it go in section 4? Section 4 is } > for devices. module(4) doesn't represent any kind of device. Seems to } > me that section 7 would be the best place. } } Done and done. While I am at it, even though CVS is what it is, should we } move few other things to the section 7 as well? At least security(8) comes } to mind, although the section 8, "NetBSD System Manager's Manual", is kind } of all-encompassing. Section 8 is normally for administrator commands, so yeah, it security(8) probably belongs in section 7 too. }-- End of excerpt from Jukka Ruohonen
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:16:36AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote: > Silly question, but why would it go in section 4? Section 4 is > for devices. module(4) doesn't represent any kind of device. Seems to > me that section 7 would be the best place. Done and done. While I am at it, even though CVS is what it is, should we move few other things to the section 7 as well? At least security(8) comes to mind, although the section 8, "NetBSD System Manager's Manual", is kind of all-encompassing. - Jukka.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:16:36AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote: > Silly question, but why would it go in section 4? Section 4 is > for devices. module(4) doesn't represent any kind of device. Seems to > me that section 7 would be the best place. Well I guess it went to section 4 as the old lkm(4) was in there. If you feel strongly about this, it is just a matter of "obsolete" keywords in the set lists. Though note that perhaps it is desirable to have module(4) even without installing the man-set. - Jukka.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 12:16:36AM -0800, John Nemeth wrote: > } In addition to the generic information in the old lkm(4) page [...] > > Silly question, but why would it go in section 4? Section 4 is > for devices. module(4) doesn't represent any kind of device. Seems to > me that section 7 would be the best place. lkm(4) ended up in (4) doubtless because of this: crw-r- 1 root kmem 28, 0 Dec 27 2007 /dev/lkm and although there's some precedent for other kernel-related but non-syscall phenomena appearing in section 4, I agree that 7 is probably better. more important question: shouldn't /dev/lkm be tagged obsolete? -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On May 4, 3:25am, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: } On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 06:43:34PM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: } > Other than the rather generic description that existed in the older } > lkm(4) man page, I'm not sure what we could add. I'm not even totally } > convinced that we need to add anything... } } In addition to the generic information in the old lkm(4) page, I think we } could mention some practical things in module(4). For instance, where } modules are located on the disk (/stand/...), what precautions should be } taken into account when updating, possible common errors (e.g. the infamous } 'cannot mount root, error 79'). Silly question, but why would it go in section 4? Section 4 is for devices. module(4) doesn't represent any kind of device. Seems to me that section 7 would be the best place. }-- End of excerpt from Jukka Ruohonen
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 06:43:34PM -0800, Paul Goyette wrote: > Other than the rather generic description that existed in the older > lkm(4) man page, I'm not sure what we could add. I'm not even totally > convinced that we need to add anything... In addition to the generic information in the old lkm(4) page, I think we could mention some practical things in module(4). For instance, where modules are located on the disk (/stand/...), what precautions should be taken into account when updating, possible common errors (e.g. the infamous 'cannot mount root, error 79'). - Jukka.
re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sun, 12 Dec 2010, matthew green wrote: Log Message: Point to module(9) instead of modctl(8). We really need module(4) (not 9) like lkm(4)... don't we need both? one for the in-kernel APIs, and one for how to the user<->kern API works? Er, yes, we need both. And we actually have both! module(9) describes the in-kernel stuff modctl(2) descibes the user-kern API Other than the rather generic description that existed in the older lkm(4) man page, I'm not sure what we could add. I'm not even totally convinced that we need to add anything... - | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | | Customer Service | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com| | Network Engineer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at juniper.net | | Kernel Developer | | pgoyette at netbsd.org | -
re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> > Log Message: > > Point to module(9) instead of modctl(8). > > We really need module(4) (not 9) like lkm(4)... don't we need both? one for the in-kernel APIs, and one for how to the user<->kern API works? .mrg.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Jukka Ruohonen wrote: On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 05:07:05AM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote: Log Message: Point to module(9) instead of modctl(8). We really need module(4) (not 9) like lkm(4)... Agreed. Another question is the ever so terrible sysctl(7). (I think it should be split, but I don't have a clear plan on how to make it more sensible / readable.) A quick read of lkm.4 shows that much of its contents is sufficiently generic as to still be applicable to modules. And most of the rest should be fairly easy to update/modify. If I can find some spare time, I might give it a try, unless someone does it sooner. As for sysctl(7), that one is just a monstrous nightmare. :) - | Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: | | Customer Service | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee.com| | Network Engineer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at juniper.net | | Kernel Developer | | pgoyette at netbsd.org | -
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 05:07:05AM +0900, Izumi Tsutsui wrote: > > Log Message: > > Point to module(9) instead of modctl(8). > > We really need module(4) (not 9) like lkm(4)... Agreed. Another question is the ever so terrible sysctl(7). (I think it should be split, but I don't have a clear plan on how to make it more sensible / readable.) - Jukka.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> Log Message: > Point to module(9) instead of modctl(8). We really need module(4) (not 9) like lkm(4)... --- Izumi Tsutsui
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 11:15:28AM +, Julio Merino wrote: > Log Message: > Add the tests(7) manual page, which describes why and how to run the > test suite and how to configure it. thank you! -- David A. Holland dholl...@netbsd.org
re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> >Module Name:src >Committed By: cegger >Date: Tue Jun 9 13:05:15 UTC 2009 > >Modified Files: >src/share/man/man7: hier.7 > >Log Message: >X11R6 -> X11R7 >ok wiz@ > > > R6 is still valid for many ports. When I back this out, then someone will comment, many ports already switched to R7. who said back it out? just fix it to be correct (ie, list both) I hope, those ports will switch to R7 before NetBSD 6.0. me too. want to help? .mrg.
Re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
> >Module Name: src >Committed By: cegger >Date: Tue Jun 9 13:05:15 UTC 2009 > >Modified Files: > src/share/man/man7: hier.7 > >Log Message: >X11R6 -> X11R7 >ok wiz@ > > > R6 is still valid for many ports. When I back this out, then someone will comment, many ports already switched to R7. I hope, those ports will switch to R7 before NetBSD 6.0. Christoph
re: CVS commit: src/share/man/man7
Module Name: src Committed By:cegger Date:Tue Jun 9 13:05:15 UTC 2009 Modified Files: src/share/man/man7: hier.7 Log Message: X11R6 -> X11R7 ok wiz@ R6 is still valid for many ports. .mrg.
