Improvement to pthread_getspecific(3)

[Patrick Kelsey]

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:10 PM, John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Monday, May 18, 2015 02:04:17 PM Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 May 2015, Patrick Kelsey wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'd like to make the attached improvement to pthread_getspecific(3),
> and
> > > this is my first time through a man page edit/commit, so I have a
> couple of
> > > questions and would like to catch whatever else I'm missing.
> > >
> > > 1. Attribution - I'm using a lightly edited line from
> > >
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_getspecific.html
> > > (edited to account for the fact that we do not document both
> > > pthread_getspecific() and pthread_setspecific() in the same man
> page).  I'm
> > > assuming that this falls under whatever agreement covers the existing
> man
> > > page (which was constructed in similar fashion), but there is
> currently no
> > > attribution in pthread_getspecific(3) and I'm not aware of what
> agreement
> > > may be in place that allows for this.
> >
> > I'm not aware of what agreement may be in place, either.
>
> There is something, but I think it requires explicit attribution when used?
> Hopefully someone else remembers the details.
>

I found this press release which describes the agreement:
http://www6.opengroup.org/comm/press/01jun04.htm

It would be nice to know we have a local record of that somewhere, as the
first few attempts at turning something like this up resulted in dead links
into the open group site.



>
> > In a somewhat related vein, I do note:
> > .Sh STANDARDS
> > The
> > .Fn pthread_getspecific
> > function conforms to
> > .St -p1003.1-96 .
> >
> >
> > > 2. Markup - should I be using .Pq instead of explicit parentheses?
> >
> > We do not have a strong preference for Pq over explicit parentheses, so I
> > would leave them in.
>
> Ah, I thought we preferred mdoc markup (Pq, Dq, etc.) when possible.
>
> --
> John Baldwin
>