Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 May 2003 21:15:07 -0400
From:      Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Christian Brueffer <chris@unixpages.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD-doc@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: PR: docs/37221 && docs/51886: mount_nfs(8) options.
Message-ID:  <20030509211507.5b0b54f1.trhodes@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030508231909.GO609@unixpages.org>
References:  <20030508134407.638ff0c9.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <20030508231909.GO609@unixpages.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 9 May 2003 01:19:09 +0200
Christian Brueffer <chris@unixpages.org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:44:07PM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> > Josh, Lars,
> > 
> > After looking over this a little closer, I'm totally lost at why these
> > PRs were filed.
> > 
> > -p is listed in the manual page as a historic and deprecated option.
> > -P is listed in the manual page as obsolete.
> > 
> > I can understand removing them both from the usage message, however
> > they seem to be documented fine in the manual page (as obsolete).
> > 
> > Currently I have an email in to murray and bmah about this, and
> > my personal opinion is that the manual page is fine.
> > 
> > Any opinions on just removing the -P and -p option from the code
> > and leaving the manual page as is?  What do the other -doc committers
> > think about this?
> > 
> 
> Apparently mbr removed ISO support from the code a while ago (which
> didn't work anyway) and these are leftovers.
> It's not fatal if this stays in, but as it's something that isn't
> even implemented anymore, it would be nice to be thrown out.
> 

Cool, and I talked to bmah about it also.  I've got a fairly good
idea how I'll handle this.  Thanks.

--
Tom Rhodes



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030509211507.5b0b54f1.trhodes>