From owner-freebsd-doc Wed Jan 17 12:59:57 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from lucifer.ninth-circle.org (lucifer.bart.nl [194.158.168.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C9F037B6C9 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:59:37 -0800 (PST) Received: (from asmodai@localhost) by lucifer.ninth-circle.org (8.11.1/8.11.0) id f0HKxYU37354; Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:59:34 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from asmodai) Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 21:59:34 +0100 From: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven To: Ben Smithurst Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/24410: send(2) man page does not mention EHOSTDOWN Message-ID: <20010117215934.A37326@lucifer.bart.nl> References: <200101172050.f0HKo6U98316@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200101172050.f0HKo6U98316@freefall.freebsd.org>; from csxbcs@comp.leeds.ac.uk on Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 12:50:06PM -0800 Organisation: VIA Net.Works The Netherlands Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org -On [20010117 21:55], Ben Smithurst (csxbcs@comp.leeds.ac.uk) wrote: > > Would an explanation like > > [EHOSTDOWN] The remote host was down. > > be sufficient, or would something a bit more detailed be better? The > explanation for EHOSTUNREACH isn't very long though... For now, yes. The fact that ye at least mention it, is an improvement in itself. -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven VIA Net.Works The Netherlands BSD: Technical excellence at its best Network- and systemadministrator D78D D0AD 244D 1D12 C9CA 7152 035C 1138 546A B867 Killing me is not enough to make me go away... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message