getopt.3: further clarify behaviour
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213013
--- Comment #5 from Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) ([email protected]) --- Hi James,
Sorry for the delay!
(In reply to James Hunt from comment #4)
Quoted 3 lines
Thanks again for reviewing. I've updated the patch but I still think it needs to be "spelt out" that two plus symbols may be required since that avoids any confusion.
Okay.
Quoted 3 lines
Also, I'm afraid I'm using a webmailer so submitting patches to a mailing list is going to be painful for me, whereas this bugzilla is quick and easy (and doesn't require me to register,
BTW, you don't need to subscribe to <[email protected]> to post there :-)
But, I understand the rest.
Quoted 4 lines
format mails in particular ways, plus
of course to manage a ton more emails ;) But if the real action is happening on the ML, I wonder if in the future it might be possible to forward all bugzilla activity automatically to the ML rather than_viceversa_?
Yes. After you said these, I remembered that I asked about that some time ago.
The ML was subscribed again to this bugzilla activity :)
Now the review:
Could you please use '.IR ...' instead of '\fI...\fP...'?
See this extract from man-manpages(7):
[[
The preferred way to write this in the source file is:
.BR fcntl ()
(Using this format, rather than the use of "\fB...\fP()" makes it easier to write tools that parse man page source files.)
]]
Quoted 1 line
Thanks again for your help.
Thank you!
Alex
Signature · 4 lines
You may reply to this email to add a comment. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching the assignee of the bug.