From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/3614 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Landley Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Re: Linux manpages (was Re: [musl] Request for volunteers) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:39:34 -0500 Message-ID: <1373485174.27613.41@driftwood> References: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1373485199 12397 80.91.229.3 (10 Jul 2013 19:39:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:39:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Rich Felker , musl@lists.openwall.com To: mtk.manpages@gmail.com Original-X-From: musl-return-3618-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 10 21:40:01 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ux0Ew-0007TL-I9 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:39:50 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 21645 invoked by uid 550); 10 Jul 2013 19:39:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 21635 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2013 19:39:49 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:in-reply-to:x-mailer:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=8kob8grHZ9edCAUt8f3d3pbSvNSZcZCode2YMMlGZck=; b=RYwx8bL362pIgsOGjGom4spGKpTVT+pDP/a3mnA3ngOHOOLmeWA+O6gbuDhphnW8mR pC++sDU9fpbWm3/oXFkoj+mBwnfzz1wKR60/olFbLSqXWFpGqEQqP8VKzdYuGsOO2zXt 8ejm3kC45M3Imr2/u9rUIiusv3fZr/Gsmr+UTZt5YHj/Reyft6RvZrp3OLi6m+RvXPaM cTzccdEMz5ebP9WRkp3BIZfPvoQYl8RqVVGIKNL+jKHhTYK194d4w0DKVZ/4HJCdicVe FBomYRzvbGHRR9ZMUqxWOOcTZWdG55Ls01T/bZ2sJQ9/c66keKNxtO/4Ngx1AwB2I1z1 clOQ== X-Received: by 10.236.154.37 with SMTP id g25mr19436028yhk.216.1373485177717; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:39:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (from mtk.manpages@gmail.com on Tue Jul 9 00:28:17 2013) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.11 Content-Disposition: inline X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnbPhD3Plq7veR+BN02pr4DzNyOTfPWS9FLrxHAZ9tbnbacs1EFZDASL2lOm1JAjZFulRVg Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:3614 Archived-At: On 07/09/2013 12:28:17 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> > the syscall is insufficient to provide POSIX semantics, which =20 > are left > >> > to userspace to provide. Such section 2 pages could then have > >> > corresponding section 3 pages that document the library behavior. > >> > >> See =20 > https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/todo.html#migrate_to_kernel_source > >> I think it would be a retrograde step to split syscall pages into > >> Sections 2 and 3. I note that I'm nominally the kernel Documentation maintainer. If you'd =20 like a Documentation/syscall directory handed over to you in =20 MAINTAINERS, I can do that. (Or Documentation/DocBook/syscall, up to =20 you...) (I don't do nearly enough with it due to lack of time, and because =20 every patch series in the world has a documentation bit I get cc'd on =20 and How am _I_ supposed to judge the correct locking requirements for a =20 Heterodyne Death Ray so half the time I just go "You need a comma in =20 'Fools I shall destroy you all!'" and then ack it. Still eats up the =20 time I have to devote to that topic, most weeks.) At some point I'd like to completely reorganize that directory so (for =20 example) all the architecture directories are under "arch". But this =20 involves me setting up a git tree somewhere I can upload to and send =20 pull requests about, and that's just icky enough to stay well below the =20 surface of my todo list... > > Yes, that's understandable. I somewhat question why we even still =20 > have > > a "section 2" in the manual, though... >=20 > Well then, you'll be amused to hear that the discussion with the BSD > maintainers was about whether FreeBSD (and others) should simply merge > Sections 2 and 3. I can see arguments in favor of it, but they're not > (to my mind) compelling. See one piece from the thread below. A system call is a different thing than a library call, even in libc. =20 The fact glibc gets them confused is a problem with glibc. In theory there is a "clean upstream" system call set in posix, and a =20 "clean upstream" libc call set in c99 and/or posix. (In practice =20 there's noting like subscribing to the austin group mailing list to =20 rapidly erode your faith in the upcoming Posix standard. The sausage is =20 made of people! And they're _INSANE_.) Rob=