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 o7TBXCqL012585
	for <discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv>; Sun, 29 Aug 2010 07:33:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (1000@localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by kerhand.co.uk (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id ij0NwmkG;
	Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:32:46 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:32:46 +0059
From: Jason McIntyre <jmc@kerhand.co.uk>
To: Thomas Klausner <wiz@NetBSD.org>
Cc: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv
Subject: Re: mdoc.7: tweak skeleton file
Message-ID: <20100829113310.GB10462@bramka.kerhand.co.uk>
References: <20100826182407.GD31244@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C797BBE.7060500@bsd.lv> <20100828220118.GE25626@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C7988EC.2050603@bsd.lv> <20100828223857.GH25626@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C79986D.6050801@bsd.lv> <sfid-H20100829-111054-+034.82-1@spamfilter.osbf.lua> <20100829091037.GA10462@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <20100829105032.GD12803@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
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: <20100829105032.GD12803@danbala.tuwien.ac.at>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 12:50:32PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> 
> Well, here's the correction. That's the order currently checked by
> pkgsrc/textproc/mdoclint/files/mdoclint:
>         my @sections = (
>                 "NAME",
>                 NETBSD ? "LIBRARY" : undef,
>                 "SYNOPSIS",
>                 "DESCRIPTION",
>                 "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES",
>                 "RETURN VALUES",
>                 "ENVIRONMENT",
>                 "FILES",
>                 "EXIT STATUS",
>                 "EXAMPLES",
>                 "DIAGNOSTICS",
>                 "COMPATIBILITY",
>                 "ERRORS",
>                 "SEE ALSO",
>                 "STANDARDS",
>                 "HISTORY",
>                 "AUTHORS",
>                 "CAVEATS",
>                 "BUGS",
>                 NETBSD ? "SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS" : undef
>         );
> 
> (Btw, pages actually using IMPLEMENTATION NOTES are e.g. bdes(1),
> which compares to Sun's implementation; or stdio(3), which mentions
> which functions are macros or support locking.)
> 
> Cheers,
>  Thomas

grr, we were meant to keep these files in sync. can you please mail me
when you make changes to this?

anyway, i guess i can update ours. have netbsd actually moved pages into
this order then?

i'll send you a diff to mdoclint to check it's ok later. for now,
there's a grand prix on!

jmc
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv