From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 17 12:33:25 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AA0106568B for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:33:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from neuhauser@sigpipe.cz) Received: from isis.sigpipe.cz (fw.sigpipe.cz [213.192.2.210]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A60448FC13 for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:33:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by isis.sigpipe.cz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 128EC147C34; Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:19:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 14:19:50 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser To: PJ Message-ID: <20091017121950.GA54137@isis.sigpipe.cz> References: <4AD8EB8F.9010900@videotron.ca> <20091017010758.088b8b8c.freebsd@edvax.de> <4AD9016E.20302@videotron.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AD9016E.20302@videotron.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: Polytropon , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: I hate to bitch but bitch I must X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 12:33:25 -0000 On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 07:27:42PM -0400, PJ wrote: > Polytropon wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:54:23 -0400, PJ wrote: > >> but from man tunefs: > >> BUGS > >> This utility should work on active file systems. > >> What in hades does this mean--just above it says cannot be run on active > >> file systems. ??? > >> > > > > It "should". This means: Don't try that. :-) > > > > My printer isn't printing! > > But it should. > > No, it is not printing! > > Yes, but it should. > > :-) > > > > > Aha! Gotcha! Whoever wrote that has made an unintentionnal booboo. It is > a subtle difference and is indicative that whoever wrote it is not a > native english user... the meaning is clearly "should be executed, done, > carried out, performed" - should work means it can be carried out - I > think the author meant to say "should not be done" Dunno, maybe it's because E is my SL, but I fail to see the problem here. The meaning is clearly (SECTION BUGS, ffs) "The friggin program should have a feature it's currently lacking." That's not to say I haven't had my share of gripes with man pages, it's just that if you ignore the man page structure and associated meaning, you're in for trouble. Just like with any message. -- roman