[Bug 254466] sysutils/beadm-devel section (1) and sysutils/beadm section (8) for the two manual pages for beadm; consequences

From: <bugzilla-noreply_at_freebsd.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 10:55:47 UTC

Graham Perrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                URL|https://www.freebsd.org/cgi |https://www.freebsd.org/cgi
                   |/man.cgi?query=beadm&apropo |/man.cgi?query=beadm&manpat
                   |s=0&sektion=8&manpath=FreeB |h=Ports&sektion=8
                   |SD+12.2-RELEASE+and+Ports&a |
                   |rch=default&format=html     |
            Summary|sysutils/beadm manual page  |sysutils/beadm-devel
                   |in sections 1 and 8         |section (1) and
                   |                            |sysutils/beadm section (8)
                   |                            |for the two manual pages
                   |                            |for beadm; consequences

--- Comment #19 from Graham Perrin <grahamperrin@gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Wolfram Schneider from comment #13)

Most insightful, thanks. I'll edit the summary line accordingly. 

From a 'Manual Pages' (Bugzilla component) perspective, there's temptation for
me to close this bug – works as intended – however it's a thought-provoking
edge case so for now, I'll leave it open. 

Triagers: maybe change the product to 'Ports & Packages'? 


(In reply to Slawomir Wojciech Wojtczak from comment #14)

That seems reasonable, thanks, in that 
<https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/beadm/#description> and 
<https://www.freshports.org/sysutils/beadm-devel/#description> share the same
WWW link to your repo. Deletion only if you foresee no future end use of
beadm-devel as a distinct port …


For giggles and/or mind-bending: <https://forums.freebsd.org/posts/544082>
where the coding in XenForo causes recommended markup to not find the manual
page for beadm(8) in this edge case, although (with reference to the new
summary line) I'm unsure whether to treat the non-find as a partial
"consequence" of bug 254466 :-)

Thanks to all.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.