From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 8 03:31:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4615016A4D1; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 03:31:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from VARK.homeunix.com (adsl-69-107-108-110.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [69.107.108.110]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D406B43D39; Thu, 8 Jul 2004 03:31:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from VARK.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by VARK.homeunix.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i683VXgD059771; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 20:31:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: (from das@localhost) by VARK.homeunix.com (8.12.11/8.12.10/Submit) id i683VW7V059770; Wed, 7 Jul 2004 20:31:32 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@FreeBSD.ORG) Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2004 20:31:32 -0700 From: David Schultz To: Ruslan Ermilov Message-ID: <20040708033132.GA59629@VARK.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Ruslan Ermilov , src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG References: <200407072011.i67KBZ1N080679@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200407072011.i67KBZ1N080679@repoman.freebsd.org> cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.ORG cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen ftw.3 X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 03:31:36 -0000 On Wed, Jul 07, 2004, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > functions conform to > .St -p1003.1-2001 . > .Sh HISTORY > -These functions first appeared in System V Release 3. > +These functions first appeared in > +.At V.3 . > Their first > .Fx > appearance was in I avoided the above markup because it renders as 'AT&T System V.3 UNIX'. I've seen System V Release 3 written as SVR3, but not as System V.3. Is this a bug in the macro, or is there simply a convention I'm unaware of?