From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 19 16:31:18 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CBA01065B28; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:31:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE) Received: from mta-1.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de (mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [134.130.7.72]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C2B8FC2D; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:31:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chris@hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE) MIME-version: 1.0 Received: from ironport-out-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de ([134.130.5.40]) by mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-7.04 (built Sep 26 2008)) with ESMTP id <0KGR00HMAGI3CX70@mta-1.ms.rz.RWTH-Aachen.de>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.38,389,1233529200"; d="scan'208";a="5354246" Received: from smarthost-2.ms.rz.rwth-aachen.de (HELO smarthost.rwth-aachen.de) ([134.130.7.90]) by ironport-in-1.rz.rwth-aachen.de with ESMTP; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 Received: from bigboss.hitnet.rwth-aachen.de (bigspace.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.181.2]) by smarthost.rwth-aachen.de (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/1) with ESMTP id n2JG1F16005318; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from haakonia.hitnet.rwth-aachen.de ([137.226.181.92]) by bigboss.hitnet.rwth-aachen.de with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LkKgF-0006Vp-G9; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 Received: by haakonia.hitnet.rwth-aachen.de (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 43F9D3F433; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:15 +0100 From: Christian Brueffer To: danger@FreeBSD.org Message-id: <20090319160114.GA1144@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> References: <287359450.20090104174842@rulez.sk> <20090105.025058.119952164.hrs@allbsd.org> <1289663263.20090104185721@rulez.sk> <20090105.032211.33865530.hrs@allbsd.org> <20090104194844.GB1257@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary=qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS Content-disposition: inline In-reply-to: <20090104194844.GB1257@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.4-STABLE X-PGP-Key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~brueffer/brueffer.key.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: A5C8 2099 19FF AACA F41B B29B 6C76 178C A0ED 982D User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r186737 - head/sbin/geom/class/virstor X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:31:21 -0000 --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:48:44PM +0100, Christian Brueffer wrote: > On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:22:11AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: > > Daniel Gerzo wrote > > in <1289663263.20090104185721@rulez.sk>: > >=20 > > da> Hello Hiroki, > > da> > > da> Sunday, January 4, 2009, 6:50:58 PM, you wrote: > > da> > > da> > Daniel Gerzo wrote > > da> > in <287359450.20090104174842@rulez.sk>: > > da> > > da> da>> Hello Christian, > > da> da>> > > da> da>> Sunday, January 4, 2009, 4:58:32 PM, you wrote: > > da> da>> > > da> da>> > While using .Ex is good, collapsing EXIT STATUS into DIAGNOS= TICS is not. > > da> da>> > EXIT STATUS is a standard section in our manpages and it's o= rthogonal to > > da> da>> > DIAGNOSTICS. > > da> da>> > > da> da>> I am fine to revert this part, however I have trimmed this sec= tion > > da> da>> just because I didn't see it listed in the PAGE STRUCTURE DOMA= IN > > da> da>> section of the mdoc(7) manual page. > > da> da>> > > da> da>> Interestingly, it lists the DIAGNOSTICS section and explicitly > > da> da>> says that .Ex macro should be used there. > > da> > > da> > Is using .Ex macro really correct?. When geom(1) fails the exit > > da> > status will be 1, not >0. While many commands whose manual page= says > > da> > so return 1 on an error actually (especially when it is in POSIX= ), > > da> > the two are not the same at least. > > da> > > da> I thought that 1 > 0 ... (?) > >=20 > > I mean I am wondering if rewriting "1" with ">0" is reasonable or > > not. "1>0" is always true, but "1" is not equal to ">0". > >=20 > > Some other manual pages have the description "1 on error.". If we > > have a consensus on that this rewriting is reasonable, we should > > also rewrite them in consistency. > >=20 >=20 > Interesting question, I have no strong opinion for either of the > alternatives. I agree that we should standardize on one though. >=20 Any news on this? I would still like to see the original change be reverted. - Christian --=20 Christian Brueffer chris@unixpages.org brueffer@FreeBSD.org GPG Key: http://people.freebsd.org/~brueffer/brueffer.key.asc GPG Fingerprint: A5C8 2099 19FF AACA F41B B29B 6C76 178C A0ED 982D --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFJwmxKbHYXjKDtmC0RAsRPAJ41f+Qp0iEMGHvdreOA54NleeJTRQCgrfNn TotjB9UygSZKEMMfly1pugU= =t0X4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qMm9M+Fa2AknHoGS--