Jason McIntyre <j...@kerhand.co.uk> wrote: e> On Thu, Jun 02, 2022 at 02:49:43PM +0200, Jan Stary wrote: > > The following wording of dump(8) > > can IMHO be be simplified without any loss: > > > > Rewinding or ejecting tape features after a close operation > > on a tape device depend on the name of the tape unit device used. > > > > I am not a native speaker; but if I parse that right, > > what "features" are those? Rewinding or ejecting? > > Then just say that. (Surely dump does not "rewind tape features" > > or "eject tape features"). Also, "feature" being both a noun and a verb > > requires extra parsing effort, at least for a non-native speaker. So: > > > > Rewinding or ejecting a tape after a close operation > > on a tape device depends on the name of the tape unit device. > > > > so, this piece of text in dump(8) is talking about "features" because, > eject and rewind can apparently happen in different ways. if you read > "EJECT AND REWIND" in st(4), which the text directs you to in the next > sentence, you'll see what it's getting at.
I think it is great that dump hints at such behaviours in a general sense. Someone who needs to dig deeper, will do so. jmc, I think you are right about the sentence hinting about a variety-pack of behaviours. > i personally can;t really see a simpler way to say it. i suppose we > could scrap the entire paragraph and just send people to st(4), but i'm > not sure if that's any more helpful. there used to be tape drives which were not SCSI, and in the future there may be such devices again. What's going on here is that st(4) describes the behaviours in a "scsi tape specification way". The vax tree used to have a whole bunch of non-scsi tape drivers, and more exact and discrete behaviours existed in many of those. So no I don't think we can point people _directly_ at st(4), they have to discern that themselves. People will find the st(4) manual page easily. > > I don't know the difference between a "tape device" > > and a "tape unit device", so I left the "unit" there; > > if it's superfluous, it can perhaps be "name of the device". > > > > Also: > > > > dump requires operator intervention on these conditions: > > end of tape, end of dump, ... > > > > dump never required any intervention from me on an "end of dump", > > it simply says DUMP IS DONE. Would "volume" be more precise here? > > I don't use tapes, but I suppose an intervention is in order > > at "end of volume" or perhaps "end of media". > > > > never having used a tape device, i can't say anything about that. I don't understand what the proposal is.
