Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:35:18 +0200 (CEST)
From:      Paul Herman <pherman@frenchfries.net>
To:        Ben Smithurst <ben@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        Matthew Hunt <mph@astro.caltech.edu>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: "ifconfig" == "ifconfig -a"
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007191626510.236-100000@bagabeedaboo.security.at12.de>
In-Reply-To: <20000719140202.H4668@strontium.scientia.demon.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 19 Jul 2000, Ben Smithurst wrote:

> > One uses flags, or sees documentation.  :-)
> 
> Actually, I don't think I'll mention the -r flag at all.  The route(8)
> manpage isn't the right place to document netstat(1)'s flags, IMO.  I
> think I'll just say "... please use the netstat(1) command".  On second
> thoughts, I think "For that functionality, the netstat(1) command should
> be used" would be better.

Hmmm... what led to this idea was:  people who use "route print" to
print the routing table in "other" OSes need to be informed how to
print the routing table under FreeBSD.  If that's really true, some
how I have a feeling they would already know about "netstat -r" (which
AFAIK is pretty much ubiquitous among Unicies.)

Is it just me, who thinks this?

-Paul.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007191626510.236-100000>