On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 02:42:15PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 02:08:40PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > On Wed, 23 Apr 2003, Mike Barcroft wrote: > > > > > > > Daniel Eischen <deischen_at_freebsd.org> writes: > > > > > [ doc_at_ bcc:'d ] > > > > > > > > > > With 3 threading libraries, each with a set of the same man pages, > > > > > how should this be handled? It doesn't make any sense to have > > > > > all of them installed and yet it should still be possible to > > > > > install all 3 thread libraries. > > > > > > > > > > Do we need a different heirarchy for threads? > > > > > > > > Ideally, they'd all document the same specification. Perhaps there > > > > > > Right, but there may be extensions in some that aren't in the > > > others. So those would be library-specific man pages. Like > > > pthread_switch_{add,delete}_np() that I believe is only supported > > > in libc_r. I have no plans on supporting it in libpthread > > > since it really doesn't make sense there. There will also be > > > other functions available in libpthread that aren't in libc_r > > > (and perhaps libthr). > > > > > > > would be one document that discusses the pros and cons of each > > > > implementation with instructions on enabling them. > > > > > > Right, I think an overall 'man threads' should give you that. > > > Eventually, libc_r should be deprecated so placing the common > > > man pages in there doesn't make sense. Of course we can ignore > > > it until we get to that point. > > > > > > I've currently got the man pages commented out of libpthread's > > > Makefile 'cause it doesn't make sense to install them over > > > those installed by libc_r. I'm just raising the issue; I'll > > > do whatever the doc guys recommend. > > > > > Since libpthread and libthr aren't getting built by default, > > this is a minor issue now. If you're about to enable either > > one or both, the one that is not optional (libc_r is optional) > > should get the common manpages. If all libraries are optional, > > either one (most commonly used) could get the manpages, and > > others should have .PATH to them. Another issue is the .Lb > > call in these manpages. They should be fixed to give all three > > libraries. I will have to fix the .Lb macro first to make > > this work. > > OK, for now I'll assume libc_r is not optional and we'll > update the man pages within there. And as wollman suggested, > if there are library-specific man pages, we'll add them to > the common set of man pages and document the differences > from the other libraries. > When I fix the .Lb macro, I will let you know. Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Sysadmin and DBA, ru_at_sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru_at_FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:04 UTC