Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 12 Mar 2004 16:17:51 +0300
From:      Roman Kurakin <rik@cronyx.ru>
To:        non@ever.sanda.gr.jp
Cc:        imp@bsdimp.com
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man4/man4.i386 ct.4
Message-ID:  <4051B87F.5000008@cronyx.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20040312.145935.18322000.non@ever.sanda.gr.jp>
References:  <4048730A.10109@cronyx.ru> <20040306.214705.109508001.non@ever.sanda.gr.jp> <20040306.073514.38701247.imp@bsdimp.com> <20040312.145935.18322000.non@ever.sanda.gr.jp>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
non@ever.sanda.gr.jp wrote:

>From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
>Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 07:35:14 -0700 (MST)
>  
>
>>: > >Maybe just a simple note in non-san's ct.4 man page would solve this
>>: > >for now, and a greater attention to avoid clashes in the future.
>>: > >
>>: > Why not to create man4.pc98?
>>: 
>>: I am not sure here, but my guess is, we have several man pages which
>>: are shared between i386/i386 and i386/pc98. So if we just create
>>: man4.pc98 just like other architectures, we will have to copy and
>>: maintain those pages.
>>
>>We can easily 'reach over' in the Makefile for man4.pc98 for the list
>>of things that's shared.
>>    
>>
>
>OK, I now understand how to do it. 
>
>I am not against creating man4.pc98 and I am preparing for
>it. However, I prefer the name `ctau.4' since we are using the name
>in, 
>- sys/dev/`ctau'
>- sys/dev/`ctau'.c
>  
>
sys/dev/if_ct.c
sys/dev/ctddk.c

>- device line in sys/i386/conf/NOTES
>and so on. People who don't know about ctau will want to see ctau.4
>  
>
There is a link from ct.4 to ctau.4

>not ct.4. People who do know adding the `device ctau' line  in the
>conf file don't need the manual page or want to see ctau.4. People who
>know `ct' in Linux can easily search NOTES or do `man -k' by `ct' or
>the name of the hardware. I also think we should change the name in
>sys/conf/majors too. 
>  
>
kernel is configured only once, but interface "ifconfig ct0" is used 
every day.
There is no problem that Linux driver uses name ct. There is a problem 
that network interface
name, netgraph node name is "ct" for a long long time.

>Second reason is that we should not use the same name for the
>different drivers in FreeBSD. It is confusing and may cause
>confliction as nyan-san suggests.
>
>Although, Warner-san wrote both are `nitch' device, the SCSI cards
>which ct driver supoort are not `nitch' device. They are major devices
>for pc98. Since first one (original one from NEC) was introduced in
>the early days of PC-9801 series and they are used as the only SCSI
>supporting host adapters for years. 
>
>// Noriaki Mitsunaga //
>
>
>  
>





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4051B87F.5000008>