From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jul 7 8:36:10 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E12B37BED1 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:36:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28873; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 09:36:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id JAA62175; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 09:35:36 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <200007071535.JAA62175@harmony.village.org> To: Alfred Perlstein Subject: Re: Why don't section 4 pages live with their drivers? Cc: Marius Bendiksen , Sheldon Hearn , arch@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jul 2000 08:26:17 PDT." <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> References: <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <200007070438.WAA58169@harmony.village.org> <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <200007071522.JAA62042@harmony.village.org> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 09:35:36 -0600 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> Alfred Perlstein writes: : * Warner Losh [000707 08:23] wrote: : > In message <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> Alfred Perlstein writes: : > : Putting the manpages in the same directory shouldn't be that painful : > : and makes getting at them easier. : > : : > : What's wrong with sys/pci/xl.4 ? : > : > That's 7 extra files in sys/isa, but on the order of 30 in sys/pci. : > That's starting to get painful, imho. : : I'm not sure I understand the 'pain' of that, is it just because you : feel that it would bloat src/sys? I understand that concern but I : don't really agree that it would be a problem. No. The pain in sys/pci is that they would be in the way and make it harder to edit files and the like. Directory listings would be longer and would no longer fit on one screen, making files harder for humans to find. There's no need to move them there. Also, the man pages would be at xl.4, while the code would be at if_xl.c, which is a little confusing. Also, there's the whole netgraph set of man pages. netgraph lives in sys/net for the most part. It put its man pages illegally in modules/netgraph/foo/foo.4 (that tree's supposed to contain only Makefiles). We'd need to move them somewhere. We would be faced with the choice of creating a dev/netgraph for them (which isn't a horrible idea), or putting them into sys/net, which isn't desirable, but might be palatable. I think that having the man pages in the sys/dev/foo/foo.4 is an OK thing to do. But I have some concerns about it. Having them all in the dev tree would make the mods to the build system to support this easier, but I don't think we can reasonably expect them all to be in dev. Also, there's different versions of some of the man pages for alpha, i386 and pc-98. At least I think that's the case. I know for pc-98 there are additional flags and I thought those were documented in its own set of man pages for ed (since it has its own driver for ed), but I could be mistaken. Finally you have the issue of translators and docs people. They have all the files they need in one place righ tnow. It is easy to find and translate. If you move the man pages from there, as some people have done, it makes it harder for them to find them and easier for the man pages to get overlooked. I'm not violently opposed to this or anything, but there are lots of issues that need to be dealt with if you are serious about moving things. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message