From owner-cvs-all Sun Sep 5 14:53:19 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk (nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk [193.237.89.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2359D15197; Sun, 5 Sep 1999 14:53:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk) Received: from kilt.nothing-going-on.org (kilt.nothing-going-on.org [192.168.1.18]) by nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA79297; Sun, 5 Sep 1999 22:44:45 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from nik@catkin.nothing-going-on.org) Received: (from nik@localhost) by kilt.nothing-going-on.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id AAA08665; Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:07:26 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from nik@catkin.nothing-going-on.org) Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 00:07:26 +0100 From: Nik Clayton To: Chris Costello Cc: Nik Clayton , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/share/sgml man-refs.ent Message-ID: <19990905000726.A7803@kilt.nothing-going-on.org> References: <199909031709.KAA25800@freefall.freebsd.org> <19990904104914.D35349@holly.calldei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <19990904104914.D35349@holly.calldei.com>; from Chris Costello on Sat, Sep 04, 1999 at 10:49:14AM -0500 Organization: FreeBSD Project Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Sat, Sep 04, 1999 at 10:49:14AM -0500, Chris Costello wrote: > On Fri, Sep 03, 1999, Nik Clayton wrote: > > nik 1999/09/03 10:09:02 PDT > > > > Modified files: > > share/sgml man-refs.ent > > Log: > > New entities for make(1), rlogin(1), scp(1), ssh(1), ssh-add(1), > > ssh-agent(1), ssh-keygen(1), and telnet(1). Originally used in the > > soon-to-be-added SGML'd committer's guide. > > Should some/many/all of the make (and > others you have added to man-refs.ent) be converted to > &man.make.1; in the handbook? Without seeing specifics (and my contact lenses are killing me, so I'm going to keep this short) it depends. I wouldn't change text like . . . to build a new port you must run make . . . to . . . to build a new port you musr run &man.make.1; . . . because in that example you are explicitly listing the text of the command that the user must type in. Perhaps a better example of the same thing would be . . . to build a port whilst ignoring any errors you must run make -i . . . If that makes sense. It's quite a subjective thing, and if you can think of a better way of phrasing it (or making the rule less ambiguous) then I'm all for it. N -- [intentional self-reference] can be easily accommodated using a blessed, non-self-referential dummy head-node whose own object destructor severs the links. -- Tom Christiansen in <375143b5@cs.colorado.edu> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message