From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from kerhand.co.uk (_smtpd@82-69-137-214.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.137.214]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o6QF6lb8013263 for ; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:06:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (1000@localhost [IPv6:::1]) by kerhand.co.uk (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 54XYWiHr for ; Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:06:22 +0100 (BST) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:06:22 +0100 From: Jason McIntyre To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: Opinions on .Dd? Message-ID: <20100726150646.GE24722@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> References: <4C4BBDE5.8020901@online.de> <20100725062509.GA22919@iris.usta.de> <4C4C292C.9020500@online.de> <4C4D90CA.8010607@bsd.lv> <20100726145018.GD24722@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C4DA22A.9020905@bsd.lv> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C4DA22A.9020905@bsd.lv> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 04:56:42PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote: > > % cat foo.3 > .Dd > .Dt FOO 1 > .Os > .Sh NAME > .Nm foo > .Nd bar > .Sh DESCRIPTION > Moo. > % nroff -mandoc foo.3 > FOO(1) BSD General Commands Manual FOO(1) > > NAME > foo - bar > > DESCRIPTION > Moo. > > BSD Epoch BSD > > (Note groff output chopped, as they don't have our awesome -Owidth > argument.) This is on GNU/Linux (groff 1.18.1). I also tested on > OpenBSD and NetBSD. Same. > ah. i like it! > If you enter an invalid string, say, `.Dd urgle', then you get the > current date. > ah, ok. just w/o args gets you Epoch. i was confused because i thought you were trying to say that Dd did not accept arguments. > > even so, i think it would be great to print "Epoch". there is no > > difference between "Epoch" and "", except a little humour. > > I actually think it's a bug. > well, it's a great one. please don;t remove it. "Epoch" is exactly the correct thing to do. > What I was getting at, regarding (e.g.) DFBSD and what to put in the > `Dd' field, is maybe they're best off leaving it blank. > i don;t see the point of that. a ton of work to make things less useful. > > > > this ties in with how do we handle OS differences... different pages, or > > a single page which notes differences. the latter might seem sane, but > > it could make the page unwieldy. > > Single page, I think. Are there really so many differences? > my previous mail listed some between netbsd and openbsd. there are probably not too many, i think, but that doesn;t mean there won;t be more. single page is the easiest way to go for sure. but like, will freebsd dudes want a list of openbsd's differences in their man page(s)? and vice versa? jmc -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv