Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 09:23:05 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Valentino Crimi <tcrimi+@andrew.cmu.edu> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org>, Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sysctl descriptions Message-ID: <cqaUZ9C00UwA043Fg0@andrew.cmu.edu> In-Reply-To: <199901110458.UAA86420@dingo.cdrom.com> References: <199901110458.UAA86420@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Excerpts from FreeBSD-CVS: 10-Jan-99 Re: sysctl descriptions by Mike Smith@smith.net.au > I have a driver for a new peripheral. It's from a vendor that doesn't > want to distribute source code, so the driver comes as a KLD module. > The driver has a number of tuning options, which are exposed via the > sysctl MIB. This is where, despite having heard arguments against it, I find putting the data in /usr/share,/usr/local/share appealing, for say, make world (*cough*) or the 3rd party KLD installation software to install. Granted that the latter seems to be more of a problem. A dual mechanism, allowing for sysctl to look up the definitions via sysctl_desc, and, if blank, turn to /usr/share/sysctl/mib/some/odd/option and check for a file there. Maybe then we get the best of both worlds. Having make world get at the defintions seems like hell, though. How much could anyone be for pulling man-like-data out of source comments or source itself? I know I'm not. The need for short but also maybe more importatly long sysctl descriptions does exist. In a way, I have to agree that <80char descriptions are only slightly better than the mib name itself. Since the user currently has to troll through source for a lot of the descriptions, maybe it's not too far from having make world do the same. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cqaUZ9C00UwA043Fg0>