Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 03:21:51 +0000 From: Colin Percival <colin.percival@wadham.ox.ac.uk> To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= ), Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/fetch fetch.1 Message-ID: <6.0.1.1.1.20040126031528.0449f970@imap.sfu.ca> In-Reply-To: <200401251909.45346.wes@softweyr.com> References: <200401230450.i0N4omSZ049990@repoman.freebsd.org> <40123A86.3040102@aueb.gr> <xzp1xppt08v.fsf@dwp.des.no> <200401251909.45346.wes@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:09 26/01/2004, Wes Peters wrote: >Roger Wilco. Is it OK to make a stronger recommendation that the user >consult fetch(3) for some rather critical information about how fetch(1) >really works? As it stands, the fetch(1) page really requires reading of >fetch(3) as well, which is fine as long as we lead the reader there with >a rather blunt instrument. I'd like to add my voice to this request -- when I found fetch(1) doing odd things a few months ago, it took me a long time to make the connection to, and read, fetch(3). (Maybe I'm just dense, but I suspect I'm no worse than the average user...) Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6.0.1.1.1.20040126031528.0449f970>