some thoughts on port docs

[Pav Lucistnik]

Walt Pawley píše v čt 25. 05. 2006 v 13:50 -0700:
> On the page ...
> 
> <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-distfiles.html>
> 
> ... under the subheading ...
> 
> 5.4.2 MASTER_SITES
> 
> ... it says ...
> 
> These variables are defined in /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.sites.mk.
> There are new entries added all the time, so make sure to check
> the latest version of this file before submitting a port.
> 
> ... which is just fine ... as far as it goes.
> 
> IMHO, telling people to be sure they check something without
> telling them how, or at least linking to how, is poor form. I
> understand that old hands don't need this but new hands do and
> that's largely who good documentation is needed for.

Checking means opening /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.sites.mk and scrolling down and
back up.  What's hard here?

> On the page ...
> 
> <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/makefile-depend.html>
> 
> ... under the subheading ...
> 
> 5.7.1 LIB_DEPENDS
> 
> ... it says ...
> 
> Note: The lib part is a regular expression which is being
> looked up in the ldconfig -r output. Values such as intl.[5-7]
> and intl are allowed. The first pattern, intl.[5-7], will match
> any of: intl.5, intl.6 or intl.7. The second pattern, intl,
> will match any version of the intl library.
> 
> ... which, I suspect, is correct enough, I guess, but isn't it
> the case that a value for the lib part of intl.[5-7] would also
> match things like intlX5 or intl/7?

Even if it was true, I prefer intl.[5-7] over intl\.[5-7] in the sake of
general readability.

-- 
Pav Lucistnik <pav at oook.cz>
              <pav at FreeBSD.org>

May your arrow always find its mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: Toto je digit?ln? podepsan? ??st zpr?vy
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20060525/699cf281/attachment.sig>