Hi Jean-Philippe, sorry for answering late, i was offline.
Jean-Philippe Ouellet wrote on Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 03:05:49PM -0400: > A few days ago I saw a commit for NSD, I had never heard of it > before, so naturally, I went to read the manpage, however it wasn't > there. I cannot reproduce the problem. I just did the following: schwa...@rhea $ cd /usr/src/usr.sbin/nsd/ schwa...@rhea $ cvs up -dP schwa...@rhea $ make -f Makefile.bsd-wrapper cleandir schwa...@rhea $ make -f Makefile.bsd-wrapper obj schwa...@rhea $ make -f Makefile.bsd-wrapper 2>&1 | tee make.log schwa...@rhea $ sudo make -f Makefile.bsd-wrapper install 2>&1 | tee inst.log schwa...@rhea $ man nsd I admit the manual is not 100% correct yet, but it looks quite useable already. What exactly did you do, what exactly did you expect, what exactly happened instead? > I looked at the cvs tree, and saw that there was a manpage, > just not formatted for mandoc like all other manpages I've seen > in OpenBSD, Well, nsd.8 is written in the traditional UNIX man(7) language, not in the more powerful and modern BSD mdoc(7) language, but mandoc(1) handles man(7) all right, even without explicitly specifying the -Tman option; actually, autorecognition of man(7) and mdoc(7) is the etymological source of the troff -mandoc option and hence the name of the mandoc program. > so I read up on mdoc and rewrote the manpage. Sorry, but that's a bad idea. We don't want to maintain downstream versions of manuals in a format differing from upstream unless there are very strong reasons to do so. It's just too expensive in terms of working time. > with a few minor grammatical changes: In case those are worthwhile (i did not check), they should be submitted upstream. Yours, Ingo
