Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 22:47:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Benjamin Kaduk <bjk@freebsd.org> To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com> Cc: bjk@freebsd.org, freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/188786: Bug in inet(3) man page (inet_aton()) Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1405222244290.25244@multics.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <CAKgNAkjspVGd%2B_=amNd890aH7QySpn5OT5HROTPi5fyyZiqgWw@mail.gmail.com> References: <201405170408.s4H48Xff021996@freefall.freebsd.org> <CAKgNAkjspVGd%2B_=amNd890aH7QySpn5OT5HROTPi5fyyZiqgWw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Michael, Sorry it took me so long to reply. I had a lot of catching up to do after BSDCan... On Sat, 17 May 2014, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > I think that what makes the page a little confusing is that it uses > both terms "Internet address" and "network address" without making it > clear that they are synonymous (and thus leaving the potential for the > reader to think they are not). This might not normally be problematic, > but given that the page is also talking about the 'network' and 'host' > components of the address, there is scope for confusion. Not a big > thing, I guess, but FWIW that's the confusion that I tried to avoid in > the Linux man page by using the term "binary address"; see > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/inet.3.html#DESCRIPTION I see how there could be confusion, and we could probably do better. I'll put taking a look at this man page in general on my todo list, but leave this PR cloesd for now. (I do remember that a lot of the functional parts of classful addressing have actually been removed from FreeBSD, but not whether this part in particular was removed. I'll have to check.) Thanks again for the submission, it's always good to get suggestions. -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.1.10.1405222244290.25244>