From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-1.sys.kth.se (smtp-1.sys.kth.se [130.237.32.175]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o76GatUV029003 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 12:36:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp-1.sys.kth.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp-1.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AECF15588C for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 18:36:50 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at kth.se Received: from smtp-1.sys.kth.se ([127.0.0.1]) by smtp-1.sys.kth.se (smtp-1.sys.kth.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id lNna7jTI-72o for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 18:36:48 +0200 (CEST) X-KTH-Auth: kristaps [85.8.60.193] X-KTH-mail-from: kristaps@bsd.lv X-KTH-rcpt-to: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Received: from lappy.bsd.lv (h85-8-60-193.dynamic.se.alltele.net [85.8.60.193]) by smtp-1.sys.kth.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3442157122 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2010 18:36:48 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4C5C3A1F.8090603@bsd.lv> Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 18:36:47 +0200 From: Kristaps Dzonsons User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080812) X-Mailinglist: mdocml-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 To: discuss@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: mdoc EXIT STATUS (Was: pending open issues) References: <20100727101815.GD21455@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <4C4EC13B.1000906@bsd.lv> <20100727131709.GA16499@edoofus.dev.vega.ru> <4C4EE52F.9020601@bsd.lv> <20100727141538.GA8226@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <20100728123317.GA43609@edoofus.dev.vega.ru> <20100728133842.GB31150@bramka.kerhand.co.uk> <20100803212854.GC31307@iris.usta.de> <20100803213451.GA2770@britannica.bec.de> <4C5C2ECB.7020304@bsd.lv> <20100806161706.GA30025@iris.usta.de> In-Reply-To: <20100806161706.GA30025@iris.usta.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >>>> the exchange of information and opinions where to best put exit status >>>> documentation for section 1, 6, and 8 manuals seems unfinished to me; >>>> if i understand correctly, what FreeBSD and DragonFly want and do is >>>> plain enough (EXIT STATUS), but in NetBSD and OpenBSD, i find such >>>> information sometimes in DESCRIPTION, sometimes in DIAGNOSTICS. > >>> Well, NetBSD never went over all the man pages, but the general >>> consensus for new ones is to use EXIT STATUS. I would make that the >>> recommendation for new man pages. > >> I'm fine with this patch, given Joerg's note that Nx uses EXIT >> STATUS along with the others... > > Um, i have dropped this patch, given Joerg's note that Nx uses EXIT > STATUS along with the others... ;-) > > Remeber, my abandoned patch said: > > Others, for example > .Nx > and > .Ox , > show the same information in the > .Em DIAGNOSTICS > section or near the end of the > .Em DESCRIPTION . I mean by "given Joerg's note" that the `Nx' could be bumped up, in your patch, alongside the `Fx' and `Dx' macros and conform to what Joerg said. > We have not made a final decision yet, but we are seriously > considering to switch OpenBSD to use EXIT STATUS as well, even > though that means we will have to adapt a bit more than 1000 manuals, > and even though a section with a single sentence will not look > that pretty. But there are two arguments in favour of EXIT STATUS: > It makes finding that bit of information really easy, and it's good > when you don't need to learn different conventions for each system. That would probably make things best in the long run, I agree. Thanks, Kristaps -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv