Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:14:27 +0100 From: Nik Clayton <nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk> To: Kris Kennaway <kkenn@rebel.net.au> Cc: Nik Clayton <nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Moving ipf(1) to ipf(8)? Message-ID: <19990720211427.A4523@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907201039320.3461-100000@morden.rebel.net.au>; from Kris Kennaway on Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 10:40:03AM %2B0930 References: <19990719224454.A52115@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907201039320.3461-100000@morden.rebel.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 10:40:03AM +0930, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jul 1999, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
> > docs/7791 is of the opinion that ipf(1) should be moved to ipf(8), to
> > (among other things) be consistent with ipfw(8).
> >
> > Anyone care to comment one way or the other?
>
> Definitely.
Assuming I did this, what's the approved method?
Myself, I'd just
# mv ipf.1 ipf.8
# cvs remove ipf.1
# cvs add ipf.8
# cvs commit -m "Renamed ipf.1 to ipf.8" ipf.1 ipf.8
[... check for any other man pages that refer to ipf(1) and update
them accordingly ...]
which properly reflects that (until the change) ipf.8 didn't exist. I
*would not* use a repository copy for this.
I'm aware that some people's opinions of when you repository copy and
when you don't are different, however.
N
--
[intentional self-reference] can be easily accommodated using a blessed,
non-self-referential dummy head-node whose own object destructor severs
the links.
-- Tom Christiansen in <375143b5@cs.colorado.edu>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990720211427.A4523>