adjtimex.2: remove nonexisting reference to adjtimex(8)
PATCH 1/2 adjtimex.2: remove nonexisting reference to adjtimex(8)
Hello,
This is a patch I sent to mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe9fmgfxC/sS/[email protected] It didn't make its way to this mailing-list the first time. It's a trivial fix for an undefined
reference to adjtimex(8). Patch you received before (adjtimex.2: add
explanation about ADJ_TAI action) is patch 2/2 for adjtimex.2.
Sorry for the mistake,
Laurent
man2/adjtimex.2 +2 -2
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ .\" Modified 1997-01-31 by Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]> .\" Modified 1997-07-30 by Paul Slootman <paul-pqePwCal/[email protected]> .\" Modified 2004-05-27 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]> +.\" Modified 2014-11-28 by Laurent Georget <[email protected]> .\" .\" FIXME Document ADJ_TAI (added in Linux 2.6.26) .\" commit 153b5d054ac2d98ea0d86504884326b6777f683d
@@ -163,5 +164,4 @@ method of adjusting the system clock. .BR settimeofday (2), .BR adjtime (3), .BR capabilities (7), -.BR time (7), -.BR adjtimex (8) +.BR time (7)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Hello Laurent,
Quoted 6 lines · Laurent Georget
Hello,
This is a patch I sent to mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe9fmgfxC/sS/[email protected] It didn't make its way to this mailing-list the first time. It's a trivial fix for an undefined
reference to adjtimex(8). Patch you received before (adjtimex.2: add
explanation aboutADJ_TAIaction) is patch 2/2 for adjtimex.2.
This does not seem correct to me. Certainly on my Fedora system, there is an "adjtimex" package that installs adjtimex(8) page. So, this reference seems okay to me. Did I miss something?
Thanks,
Michael
Quoted 23 lines
man2/adjtimex.2 +2
-3@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ .\" Modified 1997-01-31 by Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]> .\" Modified 1997-07-30 by Paul Slootman <paul-pqePwCal/[email protected]> .\" Modified 2004-05-27 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]> +.\" Modified 2014-11-28 by Laurent Georget <[email protected]> .\" .\" FIXME Document ADJ_TAI (added in Linux 2.6.26) .\" commit 153b5d054ac2d98ea0d86504884326b6777f683d@@ -163,5 +164,4 @@ method of adjusting the system clock. .BR settimeofday (2), .BR adjtime (3), .BR capabilities (7), -.BR time (7), -.BR adjtimex (8) +.BR time (7) --To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Signature · 7 lines
Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): CAKgNAkhVxy9J4dQCGwEBNwWFj_vwj=xN0JNtBx=sECgP-GiusA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org
Hello again,
Quoted 6 lines · Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hello Laurent,
Quoted 2 lines · Laurent Georget
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 4 lines
This is a patch I sent to mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe9fmgfxC/sS/[email protected] It didn't make its way to this mailing-list the first time. It's a trivial fix for an undefined
reference to adjtimex(8). Patch you received before (adjtimex.2: add
explanation aboutADJ_TAIaction) is patch 2/2 for adjtimex.2.This does not seem correct to me. Certainly on my Fedora system, there is an "adjtimex" package that installs adjtimex(8) page. So, this reference seems okay to me. Did I miss something?
Ok, indeed, my mistake. This package is not part of the core system on my distribution so I found it surprising to have a link from a man2 page to a nonexisting man8 page. But now that I give a closer look, the case is the same for request_key.2 linking to request_key.8 for example so I'm wrong.
What is the policy to include a link from section 2 to section 1 or 8? I guess I'm misundestanding something here? Given the case of adjtimex(2) linking to adjtimex(8) because there is an adjtimex package which installs it, should we include a link in inotify_{init,add,...} to inotifywait.1 for example? I've always thought that pages in section 1 (or 8) and 2 should just include a link to a general page in section 7 to remain generic enough through time.
Thanks,
Laurent
Quoted 20 lines
Thanks,
Michael
Quoted 15 lines
man2/adjtimex.2 +1
-0@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ .\" Modified 1997-01-31 by Eric S. Raymond <[email protected]> .\" Modified 1997-07-30 by Paul Slootman <paul-pqePwCal/[email protected]> .\" Modified 2004-05-27 by Michael Kerrisk <[email protected]> +.\" Modified 2014-11-28 by Laurent Georget <[email protected]> .\" .\" FIXME Document ADJ_TAI (added in Linux 2.6.26) .\" commit 153b5d054ac2d98ea0d86504884326b6777f683d@@ -163,5 +164,4 @@ method of adjusting the system clock. .BR settimeofday (2), .BR adjtime (3),
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 8 lines
man2/adjtimex.2 +1
-3.BR capabilities (7), -.BR time (7), -.BR adjtimex (8) +.BR time (7) --To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
Hello Laurent,
(Sorry for the delayed follow-up.)
Quoted 19 lines · Laurent Georget
Hello again,
Quoted 6 lines · Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
Hello Laurent,
Quoted 2 lines · Laurent Georget
Hello,
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 4 lines
This is a patch I sent to mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe9fmgfxC/sS/[email protected] It didn't make its way to this mailing-list the first time. It's a trivial fix for an undefined
reference to adjtimex(8). Patch you received before (adjtimex.2: add
explanation aboutADJ_TAIaction) is patch 2/2 for adjtimex.2.This does not seem correct to me. Certainly on my Fedora system, there is an "adjtimex" package that installs adjtimex(8) page. So, this reference seems okay to me. Did I miss something?
Quoted 5 lines
Ok, indeed, my mistake. This package is not part of the core system on my distribution so I found it surprising to have a link from a man2 page to a nonexisting man8 page. But now that I give a closer look, the case is the same for request_key.2 linking to request_key.8 for example so I'm wrong.
It's not a really mistake on your part. See below.
Quoted 7 lines
What is the policy to include a link from section 2 to section 1 or 8? I guess I'm misundestanding something here? Given the case of adjtimex(2) linking to adjtimex(8) because there is an adjtimex package which installs it, should we include a link in inotify_{init,add,...} to inotifywait.1 for example? I've always thought that pages in section 1 (or 8) and 2 should just include a link to a general page in section 7 to remain generic enough through time.
To date, the policy is implicit. I've tried to make it a little more explicit by just now adding the following text to man-pages(7):
Given the distributed, autonomous nature of FOSS projects and their documentation, it is sometimes necessary—and in many cases desirable—that the SEE ALSO section includes references to manual pages provided by other projects.
Regarding your inotify example, I tried to address that case a while ago with some additions in inotify(7). But, in the general case, sometimes these references aren't in the man pages simply because no one yet thought to add or suggest them.
Thanks,
Michael
Signature · 7 lines
Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html