From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 14 07:06:00 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E85437B401 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 07:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from h132-197-179-27.gte.com (h132-197-179-27.gte.com [132.197.179.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5E043F93 for ; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 07:05:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ak03@gte.com) Received: from kanpc.gte.com (ak03@localhost [127.0.0.1]) h3EE5wfO020942; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:05:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ak03@kanpc.gte.com) Received: (from ak03@localhost) by kanpc.gte.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h3EE5vGS020923; Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:05:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 10:05:56 -0400 From: Alexander Kabaev To: Aurelien Nephtali Message-Id: <20030414100556.4a4556ef.ak03@gte.com> In-Reply-To: <20030412210921.A60261@shells.mouarf.org> References: <20030412210921.A60261@shells.mouarf.org> Organization: Verizon Data Services X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11claws42 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dlinfo() is missing in 5.0-REL X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 14:06:00 -0000 On Sat, 12 Apr 2003 21:09:21 +0200 Aurelien Nephtali wrote: > > > In FreeBSD 5.0-REL the dlinfo() manpage is present but the > > > function > does > > > not > > > seem to be implemented, is there a good reason for this ? > > > > How about, "It wasn't done yet."? :-) > > I know that it is in -CURRENT but why the manpage is present but the > function is not ? :/ Because you have inherited the man page from CURRENT? Dlinfo man page was never MFC's to 5.0 release. Also, dlinfo man page has been committed to -CURRENT _after_ corresponding function, so the situation you describe is all of your making :) -- Alexander Kabaev