Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 22:48:04 +0200 From: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@freebsd.org> To: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@freebsd.org> Cc: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@freebsd.org>, freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Use of -CURRENT manual pages in our docs Message-ID: <20021018224804.F50649@abigail.blackend.org> In-Reply-To: <20021018223014.E50649@abigail.blackend.org>; from blackend@freebsd.org on Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 10:30:14PM %2B0200 References: <20021018212220.B50649@abigail.blackend.org> <20021018194751.GG16196@hades.hell.gr> <20021018223014.E50649@abigail.blackend.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 10:30:14PM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote: > On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 10:47:51PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > On 2002-10-18 21:22, Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > It is now possible to make the difference between -STABLE and > > > -CURRENT manual pages. > > > > > > We need this for devfs, device.hints etc. manual pages in our Handbook. > > > Manual pages entities for -CURRENT should have the form: > > > > > > &man.current.foo.1; > > > > So what happens when today's current becomes tomorrow's stable? > > I hope we won't have to rename all the &man.current.foo.X; entities to > > &man.stable.foo.X; :-( > > > > Don't worry, the amount of -CURRENT manual pages we use in docs is > very light. It just allows us to use a -CURRENT manual page at same time > with -STABLE one. > I added the 'current' attribute, it can be used without a form like > &man.current.foo.1;, but when the page becomes stable, the attribute > have to be removed. > > It is just for "a little use". > > I don't know if it's good or not to know if a manpage is current or not > just in reading the entity name... > Well, this leads to a previous talk when we added manpath attributes: we should use &man.xfree86.xdm.1; or &man.xdm.1; ? The form &man.foo.1; is flexible cause we just have to change things in man-refs, but it's not easy to "read" in the sgml files. The form &man.ports.foo.1; is easy to "read" but not flexible. However, indeed, we should avoid &man.current etc. for base system manpages. Tell me what you think about it, since it's easy to fix man-refs in that way... Marc 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?20021018224804.F50649>