On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:04 PM Todd C. Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> We should only cross-reference the obsolete sigvec(3) function from > the signal compat manuals and sigaction(2). > > This also syncs the SEE ALSO section in ualarm(3) match that of > alarm(3). > ok guenther@ We could reference signal(3) in csh instead of sigaction(2) if > that's what people prefer. I see no reason to prefer signal(3) over sigaction(2) for pages that aren't about C-standard functions. Hmm: sh(1) and ksh(1) have *nothing* from sections 2 or 3 in their SEE ALSO. That doesn't seem like a wrong choice, albeit inconsistent with csh(1). Part of me feels like _if_ they're going to mention umask(2), setrlimit(2), and sigaction(2), then they should mention chdir(2), as the other classic "must be in the shell" syscall. <shrug> Philip Guenther
