Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 07 Jul 2000 09:35:36 -0600
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
Cc:        Marius Bendiksen <mbendiks@eunet.no>, Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why don't section 4 pages live with their drivers? 
Message-ID:  <200007071535.JAA62175@harmony.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jul 2000 08:26:17 PDT." <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> 
References:  <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net>  <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.BSF.4.05.10007061848400.66456-100000@login-1.eunet.no> <200007070438.WAA58169@harmony.village.org> <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> <200007071522.JAA62042@harmony.village.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000707082617.L25571@fw.wintelcom.net> Alfred Perlstein writes:
: * Warner Losh <imp@village.org> [000707 08:23] wrote:
: > In message <20000707081202.J25571@fw.wintelcom.net> Alfred Perlstein writes:
: > : Putting the manpages in the same directory shouldn't be that painful
: > : and makes getting at them easier.
: > : 
: > : What's wrong with sys/pci/xl.4 ?
: > 
: > That's 7 extra files in sys/isa, but on the order of 30 in sys/pci.
: > That's starting to get painful, imho.
: 
: I'm not sure I understand the 'pain' of that, is it just because you
: feel that it would bloat src/sys?  I understand that concern but I
: don't really agree that it would be a problem.

No.  The pain in sys/pci is that they would be in the way and make it
harder to edit files and the like.  Directory listings would be longer 
and would no longer fit on one screen, making files harder for humans
to find.  There's no need to move them there.  Also, the man pages
would be at xl.4, while the code would be at if_xl.c, which is a
little confusing.

Also, there's the whole netgraph set of man pages.  netgraph lives in
sys/net for the most part.  It put its man pages illegally in
modules/netgraph/foo/foo.4 (that tree's supposed to contain only
Makefiles).  We'd need to move them somewhere.  We would be faced with 
the choice of creating a dev/netgraph for them (which isn't a horrible 
idea), or putting them into sys/net, which isn't desirable, but might
be palatable.

I think that having the man pages in the sys/dev/foo/foo.4 is an OK
thing to do.  But I have some concerns about it.  Having them all in
the dev tree would make the mods to the build system to support this
easier, but I don't think we can reasonably expect them all to be in
dev.

Also, there's different versions of some of the man pages for alpha,
i386 and pc-98.  At least I think that's the case.  I know for pc-98
there are additional flags and I thought those were documented in its
own set of man pages for ed (since it has its own driver for ed), but
I could be mistaken.

Finally you have the issue of translators and docs people.  They have
all the files they need in one place righ tnow.  It is easy to find
and translate.  If you move the man pages from there, as some people
have done, it makes it harder for them to find them and easier for the 
man pages to get overlooked.

I'm not violently opposed to this or anything, but there are lots of
issues that need to be dealt with if you are serious about moving
things.

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007071535.JAA62175>