Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 12:14:02 -0500 (CDT) From: Bob Van Valzah <bob@NewStorm.WhiteBarn.Com> To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: docs/26881: ncr(4) makes no mention of sym(4) or relative virtues Message-ID: <200104261714.f3QHE2a01022@NewStorm.WhiteBarn.Com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Number: 26881 >Category: docs >Synopsis: ncr(4) makes no mention of sym(4) or relative virtues >Confidential: no >Severity: non-critical >Priority: low >Responsible: freebsd-doc >State: open >Quarter: >Keywords: >Date-Required: >Class: doc-bug >Submitter-Id: current-users >Arrival-Date: Thu Apr 26 10:20:01 PDT 2001 >Closed-Date: >Last-Modified: >Originator: Bob Van Valzah >Release: FreeBSD 4.2-RELEASE i386 >Organization: >Environment: >Description: The ncr(4) and sym(4) drivers both seem to cover the same chip sets. That begs the question of which driver should be used when. The sym(4) manpage at least mentions ncr(4) but never gives any reason why you'd want to use one over the other. The ncr(4) manpage doesn't even mention sym(4). >How-To-Repeat: man 4 ncr >Fix: From what I've been able to gleen from the history of these drivers, the sym(4) driver is more modern and general than ncr(4). If so, there should be a note to this effect on ncr(4). At the very least, ncr(4) should have a see also pointing to sym(4). It'd be nice if both pages contained complimentary rationalles for choosing one over the other. >Release-Note: >Audit-Trail: >Unformatted: To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200104261714.f3QHE2a01022>