The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel
From: Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:47:20 UTC
Local: Thurs, Oct 13 2005 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: man-pages-2.08 is released
On Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:52 am, Michael Kerrisk wrote: True. But there are other libcs available (e.g. klibc, dietlibc) too. > Recently, I was just wondering the same thing. However, there > are complexities to consider. C libraries (okay, glibc is the > main one I concern myself with) sometimes add some functionality > in the wrapper function for a particular system call. This also > needs to be documented in the Secion 2 page. I'd think that if the pages were bundled with the kernel, they should describe exactly what the kernel does, while pages bundled with a libc would describe any enhancements (or breakages) that the particular libc includes. But then what to do about duplicates? Or should the raw kernel interfaces have their own section, while libc interfaces remain in section 2? Or should the libc versions typically replace the kernel versions on running systems? Or 'patch' the existing kernel pages somehow? So many questions... ;) > Nevertheless, I think the idea of binding the kernel sources and That was my though too; it's certainly easier to ask people to update > Sections 2 and 4 of the manual pages a bit more tightly bears > some consideration. In the ideal world, when a change is made to > the kernel, the patch could include adjustments to the man > pages (if relevant) -- then the changes could follow the patch > through the -mm tree and then into Linus's tree. manual pages in Documentation/ or man/ when they do a kernel patch than to ask them to download a separate package and make the changes (since they'll probably never get around to doing the latter :). > > OTOH, they comprise a fairly large package, so adding them to the Ok, that's not too bad. Having full, up-to-date man pages would be worth > > kernel tarball would increase its size a lot. > I'd guess that the uncompressed source of the relevant pages the extra few megs to me at least. > > The man pages are great; Many thanks to both of you then! > Thanks. But the greatest part of credit must go to Andries, Jesse You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||