From owner-freebsd-doc Mon May 20 18:50:18 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C5737B407 for ; Mon, 20 May 2002 18:50:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g4L1o3R30761; Mon, 20 May 2002 18:50:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 20 May 2002 18:50:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200205210150.g4L1o3R30761@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Giorgos Keramidas Subject: Re: docs/38318: Many typo, grammar, and minor tag patches. Reply-To: Giorgos Keramidas Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR docs/38318; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Chris Pepper Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: docs/38318: Many typo, grammar, and minor tag patches. Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 04:41:17 +0300 On 2002-05-19 23:53, Chris Pepper wrote: > Hello Chris, I've only commented on where changes were probably needed. The rest of the diff looks OK :) > > <filename>/etc/mail/virtusertable</filename> > > - The virtualusertable maps mail for > + The virtualusertable maps mail addresses for Shouldn't this be `virtusertable' instead of `virtualusertable' to match the title? > sendmail-compatible system. If > applications continue to use > sendmail's binaries to try and send > - e-mail after you have disabled it, the mail may transparently > - queue forever. > + e-mail after you have disabled it, the mail may silently > + wait forever. Why would they wait forever? Perhaps we could clarify this a bit more, writing? e-mail after you have disabled it, the mail may silently get queued and never be delivered. > root. The script should also accept the > - parameters 'start' and 'stop'. So that you could, for example, execute > + parameters 'start' and 'stop'. The system will execute it with these arguments at start and shutdown time, e.g., > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/supermailer.sh start > - or /usr/local/etc/rc.d/supermailer.sh stop. > - The system will call your script using 'start' when the it > - boots and using 'stop' when the it shuts down. > + or /usr/local/etc/rc.d/supermailer.sh stop; you can also do this manually to start and stop your new MTA. This changes the original text a lot, and breaks the style of the original text without sounding a lot better, imho. How about being just a bit more verbose? ... The script should also accept the start and stop parameters. At startup time the system scripts will execute the command /usr/local/etc/rc.d/supermailer.sh start which you can also use later on, to manually start the server. At shutdown time, the system scripts will use the stop option, running the command /usr/local/etc/rc.d/supermailer.sh start which you can also use to manually stop the server, while the system is running. That is a lot more verbose, but is a small step towards making the entire thing harder to misunderstand, IMHO. What do you think? > For this reason, many alternative MTA's provide utilities > - that implement exactly the same command-line interface > - that sendmail provides. > + that implement the sendmail command-line interface exactly. Why do I not like the replacement text? :/ Apart from style issues, that is. > - This means that when any of these common commands > - are run, such as /usr/bin/sendmail > - the program that is actually sitting in that location > - checks mailer.conf and > - executes /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail > - instead. This system makes it easy to change what binaries > + This means, for example, that when sendmail is invoked, /usr/bin/mailwrapper is actually executed; mailwrapper checks mailer.conf, and based on what it finds there, executes /usr/libexec/sendmail/sendmail. This system makes it easy to change what binaries No thank you. This is way too complicated as a change to even try to sort it out and see what changed. Can we have another go at this? > - When the senders' sendmail is trying to > + When the sender's sendmail is trying to > deliver the mail it will try to connect to you over the modem Everyone's sendmail. All the senders' sendmail. :-) > - this list, providing the user has an account on your > - system, will succeed. This is a very nice way to allow > + this list (provided the user has an account on your > + system), will succeed. This is a very nice way to allow Looks fine (although I have to admit the coma after the parentheses looked a bit strange at first). Nice catch :) > If that is what you see, mail directly to > yourlogin@example.FreeBSD.org should work without > - problems. > + problems (assuming sendmail is running correctly on example.FreeBSD.org). I guess wrapping is ok here :) > freefall MX 20 who.cdrom.com > > As you can see, freefall had many MX entries. > - The lowest MX number is the host that ends up receiving the mail in > - the end while the others will queue mail temporarily if > - freefall is busy or down. > + The lowest MX number is the host that receives mail directly if available; if it's not accessible for some reason, the others (sometimes called backup MXes) accept messages temporarily, and pass it along when a lower-numbered host becomes available, eventually to the lowest-numbered host. and necessary here! > If you are doing virtual email hosting, the following > - information will come in handy. For the sake of an example, we > + information will come in handy. For the example, we "For this example ..." ? -- Giorgos Keramidas - http://www.FreeBSD.org keramida@FreeBSD.org - The Power to Serve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message