From owner-freebsd-doc Tue Mar 19 2:30: 7 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4878737B402 for ; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 02:30:02 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g2JAU1815849; Tue, 19 Mar 2002 02:30:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 02:30:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200203191030.g2JAU1815849@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Giorgos Keramidas Subject: Re: docs/35949: [PATCH] rtprio(1) man page uses incorrect english Reply-To: Giorgos Keramidas Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR docs/35949; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Hiten Pandya Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/35949: [PATCH] rtprio(1) man page uses incorrect english Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:21:49 +0200 (EET) Adding to audit trail: | Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:33:16 +0000 (GMT) | From: Andrew McKay | Subject: Re: docs/35949: [PATCH] rtprio(1) man page uses incorrect english | | On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, Hiten Pandya wrote: | | > The rtprio(1) uses incorrect english in the BUGS section. | | Not true. | | > -There is in | > -.Fx | > -no way to ensure that a process page is present in memory therefore | > +There is no way in | > +.Fx , | > +to ensure that a process page is present in memory therefore | | This replaces correct grammar with correct grammar. It also shifts the | emphasis away from 'in FreeBSD' which, I assume, is where it is meant to | lie otherwise the inclusion of 'in FreeBSD' is unnecessary. If this | absolutely needs to be changed, which, imho, it does not, then 'In FreeBSD | there is no way...' would be the more correct way to change it. | | > -system calls are currently never preempted, therefore non-realtime | > +system calls are currently not preempted, therefore non-realtime | | Why? If they are not preempted then they must never be preempted. I would | argue that 'never' is more correct and less ambiguous unless the statement | is untrue in which case the statement is also untrue as changed. This | seems to be a gratuitous change although the addition of a comma after | FreeBSD is most welcome. Personally I'd remove 'Under', which | would alleviate the need for a comma altogether and make the sentence | cleaner and terser. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message