From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Nov 9 9:30: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8DE137B41B for ; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:30:01 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) id fA9HU1X08914; Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:30:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:30:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200111091730.fA9HU1X08914@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Cc: From: Dima Dorfman Subject: Re: docs/31875: correct port count Reply-To: Dima Dorfman 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/31875; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Dima Dorfman To: mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/31875: correct port count Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 17:21:22 +0000 mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org wrote: > >Description: > > The count of ports in the Handbook is wrong. Handbook or FAQ? > I'm attaching two > patches for consideration: one contains an accurate count, one makes > the problem go away for good. I prefer the second, but it's an > admission that keeping track of the number of ports in the Handbook is > basically futile so people might not like that. Or we can assign the number of ports to an entity, and use that. In fact, we already have such an entity: os.numports (see share/sgml/freebsd.ent). I think we should use that in the FAQ just like we do in the Handbook. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message