cvs commit: src/share/examples/mdoc example.4

[Tom Rhodes]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 09:45:14 +0100
Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 04:15:26AM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 08:53:14 +0100
> > Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 03:41:24AM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:23:39 +0200
> > > > Christian Brueffer <brueffer at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > > | @@ -33,11 +33,9 @@
> > > > > > |  .Nm example
> > > > > > |  .Nd "example device driver manual page"
> > > > > > |  .Sh SYNOPSIS
> > > > > > | -To compile the
> > > > > > | -.Ns Nm
> > > > > > | -driver into the kernel,
> > > > > > | -place the following lines in the
> > > > > > | -kernel configuration file:
> > > > > > | +To enable support for
> > > > > > | +.Ns Nm ,
> > > > > > | +place the following lines in the kernel configuration file:
> > > > > 
> > > > > The formulation used before was much more accurate WRT the distinction
> > > > > we make between compiling something into the kernel and loading it as a
> > > > > module.  If we load something as a module we also "enable support for
> > > > > it".
> > > > 
> > > > What about in cases where other hoops must be jumped before the
> > > > driver/feature/whatever is really supported?
> > > 
> > > They can be special cased in the real manual.  In the wider sense,
> > > kldload is the easiest way to enable support for something, and I know
> > > that I'm personally well past encouraging users to recompile the kernel
> > > just to get, for example, sound working when a simple kldload does the
> > > job just as well in most cases.
> > 
> > That is of course that "something" has a module.  ;)
> 
> Well yes, which is why the previous text explicitly said "to compile .Nm
> into the kernel", because that's what the example does.
> 
> > Seriously though, why handle one case any differently than
> > another?
> 
> Compiling something into the kernel and loading a module are different,
> that's why, and we should be clear about the distinction (because, as
> you state, some modules don't exist).

You're right we should.  How about "To ... the ... ABC
(or XYZ or ...)?

> 
> > > > > > |  .Bd -ragged -offset indent
> > > > > > |  .Cd "device example"
> > > > > > |  .Cd "options EXAMPLE_DEBUG"
> > > > > > | @@ -45,9 +43,9 @@ kernel configuration file:
> > > > > > |  .Pp
> > > > > > |  Alternatively, to load the
> > > > > > |  .Ns Nm
> > > > > > | -driver as a
> > > > > > | -module at boot time, place the following line in
> > > > > > | -.Xr loader.conf 5 :
> > > > > > | +as a module at boot time, add the following line into the
> > > > > > | +.Xr loader.conf 5
> > > > > > | +file:
> > > > > > |  .Bd -literal -offset indent
> > > > > > |  example_load="YES"
> > > > > > |  .Ed
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Removing "driver" here is wrong.  "...to load the .Nm..." what, the .Nm
> > > > > driver?  The .Nm utility?  It's just incorrect to rely on context here
> > > > > and it makes the sentence sound really awkward.
> > > > 
> > > > Leaving driver here is wrong.
> > > 
> > > Not if you also leave the word "the" before .Nm.
> > 
> > Then we should bloat it to handle "the XXX driver," "the XXX
> > subsystem," "the XXX system," etc.  To be honest, the sentence
> > sounds better to me this way.  And putting "driver" back in
> > just does what Christian says it's there to prevent.  We should
> > not really "rely on the context" here, so I agree with Christian.
> > We shouldn't believe that it will always be a "driver."
> > 
> > In any sense, it's still just an "example."  We are arguing over
> > an "example" people.
> 
> No, we're arguing over grammar.  The sentence currently renders as
> something like:
> 
> 	Alternatively, to load the fxp(4) as a module at boot time...
> 
> That's wrong.  Getting rid of "the" works.

I like "enable" in the first bit, and I'll agree "the" should
go, even though your argument works in some cases but fails
in others.

-- 
Tom Rhodes