From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 4 20:46:35 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13D2810656D9; Sun, 4 Jan 2009 20:46:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.allbsd.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:2f0:104:e001::32]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDDD8FC17; Sun, 4 Jan 2009 20:46:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from delta.allbsd.org (p2191-ipbf1403funabasi.chiba.ocn.ne.jp [118.7.161.191]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.allbsd.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id n04KkML5059852; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:46:33 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (alph.allbsd.org [192.168.0.10]) (authenticated bits=0) by delta.allbsd.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n04KjuOP063800; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:45:59 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from hrs@FreeBSD.org) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 05:44:35 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20090105.054435.125149473.hrs@allbsd.org> To: chris@unixpages.org From: Hiroki Sato In-Reply-To: <20090104194844.GB1257@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> References: <1289663263.20090104185721@rulez.sk> <20090105.032211.33865530.hrs@allbsd.org> <20090104194844.GB1257@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> X-PGPkey-fingerprint: BDB3 443F A5DD B3D0 A530 FFD7 4F2C D3D8 2793 CF2D X-Mailer: Mew version 6.2 on Emacs 22.2 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="--Security_Multipart(Mon_Jan__5_05_44_35_2009_132)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.93.3, clamav-milter version 0.93.3 on gatekeeper.allbsd.org X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (mail.allbsd.org [133.31.130.32]); Mon, 05 Jan 2009 05:46:33 +0900 (JST) Cc: danger@FreeBSD.org, doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r186737 - head/sbin/geom/class/virstor X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 20:46:36 -0000 ----Security_Multipart(Mon_Jan__5_05_44_35_2009_132)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Christian Brueffer wrote in <20090104194844.GB1257@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE>: ch> On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 03:22:11AM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote: ch> > I mean I am wondering if rewriting "1" with ">0" is reasonable or ch> > not. "1>0" is always true, but "1" is not equal to ">0". ch> > ch> > Some other manual pages have the description "1 on error.". If we ch> > have a consensus on that this rewriting is reasonable, we should ch> > also rewrite them in consistency. ch> > ch> ch> Interesting question, I have no strong opinion for either of the ch> alternatives. I agree that we should standardize on one though. IMO, the following guidelines are reasonable: 1. If the command conforms a standard such as POSIX, the description in the manual page should match the standard. For example, ls(1) returns >0 on error, but what(1) returns 1 on error. 2. Otherwise, EXIT STATUS section should match the reality as possible. This means if a command returns 0 on success, 1 on error, and the other values are not returned, the description in the manual page should be "it exits 0 on success, and 1 if an error occurs". -- | Hiroki SATO ----Security_Multipart(Mon_Jan__5_05_44_35_2009_132)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAklhH7MACgkQTyzT2CeTzy2jWwCghTO+YZnKp1SjtWcLHKraBZDM z5kAnjC8wwmIsfUEyk/xXbhlG8TUlWtT =p+/e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart(Mon_Jan__5_05_44_35_2009_132)----