mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk-manpages@gmx.net>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michael.kerrisk@gmx.net,
	Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl
Subject: Re: man-pages-2.08 is released
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:52:13 +0200 (MEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20785.1129193533@www73.gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200510121010.16274.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>

> Von: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> 
> On Wednesday, October 12, 2005 9:26 am, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > This is a request to kernel developers: if you make a change
> > to a kernel-userland interface, or observe a discrepancy
> > between the manual pages and reality, would you please send
> > me (at mtk-manpages@gmx.net ) one of the following
> > (in decreasing order of preference):
> 
> Would it make sense for some of the man pages (or maybe all of them) that 
> correspond directly to kernel interfaces (e.g. syscalls, procfs & sysfs 
> descriptions) to be bundled directly with the kernel?  Andrew is 
> generally pretty good about asking people to update the stuff in 
> Documentation/ when necessary, so maybe the man pages would be kept more 
> up to date if developers were forced to deal with them more directly.

Recently, I was just wondering the same thing.  However, there 
are complexities to consider.  C libraries (okay, glibc is the 
main one I concern myself with) sometimes add some functionality 
in the wrapper function for a particular system call.  This also
needs to be documented in the Secion 2 page. 

Nevertheless, I think the idea of binding the kernel sources and 
Sections 2 and 4 of the manual pages a bit more tightly bears
some consideration.  In the ideal world, when a change is made to
the kernel, the patch could include adjustments to the man 
pages (if relevant) -- then the changes could follow the patch 
through the -mm tree and then into Linus's tree.

> OTOH, they comprise a fairly large package, so adding them to the kernel 
> tarball would increase its size a lot.

I'd guess that the uncompressed source of the relevant pages 
would be around 3 MB.
 
> The man pages are great; 

Thanks.  But the greatest part of credit must go to Andries, 
the maintainer for nearly 10 years.  I'm shortly coming up to my 
first anniversary...

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
Michael Kerrisk
maintainer of Linux man pages Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 

Want to help with man page maintenance?  Grab the latest
tarball at ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux-local/manpages/
and grep the source files for 'FIXME'.

  reply	other threads:[~2005-10-13  8:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <434D5224.9754.10AC691@localhost>
2005-10-12 16:26 ` Michael Kerrisk
2005-10-12 17:10   ` Jesse Barnes
2005-10-13  8:52     ` Michael Kerrisk [this message]
2005-10-13 17:46       ` Jesse Barnes

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20785.1129193533@www73.gmx.net \
    --to=mtk-manpages@gmx.net \
    --cc=Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael.kerrisk@gmx.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®