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 o7TGH2J5025464 for ; Sun, 29 Aug 2010 12:17:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (1000@localhost [IPv6:::1]) by kerhand.co.uk (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id J8LQtDtO; Sun, 29 Aug 2010 17:16:37 +0100 (BST) Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 17:16:37 +0059 From: Jason McIntyre To: Thomas Klausner Cc: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: mdoc.7: tweak skeleton file Message-ID: <20100829161701.GC10462@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> References: <4C797BBE.7060500@bsd.lv> <20100828220118.GE25626@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C7988EC.2050603@bsd.lv> <20100828223857.GH25626@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C79986D.6050801@bsd.lv> <20100829091037.GA10462@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <20100829105032.GD12803@danbala.tuwien.ac.at> <20100829113310.GB10462@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <20100829120937.GF12803@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: <20100829120937.GF12803@danbala.tuwien.ac.at> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 02:09:38PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote: > On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 12:32:46PM +0059, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > grr, we were meant to keep these files in sync. can you please mail me > > when you make changes to this? > > I'm sorry. I changed this after the discussion in May, here's the > diff: > @@ -104,12 +104,14 @@ > NETBSD ? "LIBRARY" : undef, > "SYNOPSIS", > "DESCRIPTION", > - NETBSD ? "EXIT STATUS" : undef, > + "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES", > "RETURN VALUES", > "ENVIRONMENT", > "FILES", > + NETBSD ? "EXIT STATUS" : undef, > "EXAMPLES", > "DIAGNOSTICS", > + "COMPATIBILITY", > "ERRORS", > "SEE ALSO", > "STANDARDS", > > Actually, I don't like the new place of EXIT STATUS and prefer the old > one; very few pages have been changed to the new order (only those > with other commits since May). > Thomas well, there is nothing to say we have to move it at all. it can stay in the place it always was. however for openbsd, the choice is not so important - we currently don;t have EXIT STATUS, so as far as workload goes, it's irrelevant where we add it. i personally think it is best placed immediately after DESCRIPTION, where it always was. please let us not just think about what posix does when making this decision. i'd welcome feedback from any freebsd people at this point - maybe there was a good reason for the change. anyway, my diff below should make us match (almost) for mdoclint. note that you need to make "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES" defined for netbsd only, and "EXIT STATUS" now not os-specific. let me know what you want to do about section placement. jmc Index: mdoclint =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/regress/usr.bin/mdoclint/mdoclint,v retrieving revision 1.16 diff -u -r1.16 mdoclint --- mdoclint 10 Feb 2010 08:36:33 -0000 1.16 +++ mdoclint 29 Aug 2010 16:10:45 -0000 @@ -104,12 +104,14 @@ NETBSD ? "LIBRARY" : undef, "SYNOPSIS", "DESCRIPTION", - NETBSD ? "EXIT STATUS" : undef, + NETBSD ? "IMPLEMENTATION NOTES" : undef, "RETURN VALUES", "ENVIRONMENT", "FILES", + "EXIT STATUS", "EXAMPLES", "DIAGNOSTICS", + NETBSD ? "COMPATIBILITY" : undef, "ERRORS", "SEE ALSO", "STANDARDS", -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv