Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Jan 2002 13:51:56 -0800
From:      Murray Stokely <murray@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>
Cc:        freebsd-doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: docs/34460: potential minor error in Developer's Handbook + mem(4) man page
Message-ID:  <20020130215156.GJ9395@freebsdmall.com>
In-Reply-To: <200201301830.g0UIU1240223@freefall.freebsd.org>
References:  <200201301830.g0UIU1240223@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hey Peter,

   Good explanation.  Can you add this to the Doc Project Primer?
This should probably go near the word list.

     - Murray

On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:30:01AM -0800, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> The following reply was made to PR docs/34460; it has been noted by GNATS.
> 
> From: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>
> To: Bruce Dang <bruce@research.teamxor.org>
> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: docs/34460: potential minor error in Developer's Handbook + mem(4) man page
> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:22:59 +0200
> 
>  On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:05:25AM -0800, Bruce Dang wrote:
>  > 
>  > >Number:         34460
>  > >Category:       docs
>  > >Synopsis:       potential minor error in Developer's Handbook + mem(4) man page
>  > >Originator:     Bruce Dang
>  > >Description:
>  > On page 40 of the Developer's Handbook (PDF version), there's
>  > something like "will always null terminate the string." Shouldn't
>  > this be NUL terinated, instead of NULL (ptr).
>  
>  I think this came up recently in another context, and the resolution
>  was that both "NUL-terminated" and "null-terminated" were correct, and
>  "NULL-terminated" is definitely wrong.  NUL is right in the sense of
>  the ASCII character NUL, and 'null' is right in its semantical sense
>  of 'zero', 'emptiness' or something like that.  So, although the tide
>  may have turned since then, I doubt it, and I think that "null
>  terminated" would be right.
>  
>  > In addition to that, the mem(4) man page makes references to
>  > <memrange.h> for various #defines, but it is actually
>  > <sys/memrange.h> that defines them...
>  
>  This looks genuine.  Patch attached for the benefit of -doc
>  committers.
>  
>  G'luck,
>  Peter
>  
>  -- 
>  If there were no counterfactuals, this sentence would not have been paradoxical.
>  
>  Index: src/share/man/man4/mem.4
>  ===================================================================
>  RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/share/man/man4/mem.4,v
>  retrieving revision 1.13
>  diff -u -r1.13 mem.4
>  --- src/share/man/man4/mem.4	21 Jan 2002 12:09:13 -0000	1.13
>  +++ src/share/man/man4/mem.4	30 Jan 2002 18:21:20 -0000
>  @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@
>   calls performed on
>   .Nm /dev/mem .
>   Declarations and data types are to be found in
>  -.Pa <memrange.h>
>  +.Pa <sys/memrange.h>
>   .Pp
>   The specific attributes, and number of programmable ranges may vary between
>   architectures.  The full set of supported attributes is:
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020130215156.GJ9395>