Ray Lai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Deanna Phillips [2006-04-23]:
>> Joking aside, when I use a port and it doesn't have a manpage, I >> feel compelled to write one. It's my belief that every program >> on the system, port or not, should have a decent manpage. Am I >> alone in this? >> >> There are few things in unix that aggravate me more than: >> >> man: no entry for <util> in the manual. > > It's probably best to take it up upstream, unless you plan on > updating the man page every time the port changes. Yes, this is what I did with the recent transmission port. That doesn't solve the problem of ports being added without manual pages, though, as it would normally take a release or two (and a port update) for them to actually end up on an OpenBSD system. I guess it'd be too draconian to ask that all porters add a manual page (and submit it upstream) if their port is lacking one -- but I think it would be nice. The OpenBSD ports/packages collection is smaller and neater than those provided by most others, and something like this would make the difference more evident. Also, I've been following this project long enough to know that such ideas are cheap, so I'll add that I'm perfectly willing (and able) to write these manpages, and I'm sure there are others who would be, as well. -- deanna at sdf
