Hi Ted, Ted Unangst wrote on Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 08:48:48PM -0400: > Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> As there is no fully satisfactory option, i propose the patch below. >> It add the "-W portable" command line option, which is a variant of >> "-W style" hiding messages that only apply to base system manuals. > I'm not fond of the name portable. To me, this suggests it will check > for things which impede portability, but that's not really what it does. True. That might indeed cause misunderstandings. > Instead, I suggest shifting the names by one. Leave -W style as the > portable option, but introduce -W openbsd which performs the additional > checks. Or better, name it -W system, so as to be useful on netbsd, etc. That's a fine idea! I'll send a revised patch tomorrow. Actually, i prefer calling the option -W openbsd. In cases where you have to specify the option, -W openbsd is not harder to type than -W system, and clearer. It also saves you the additional work of having to type -Ios=OpenBSD in cases where that would be needed. And it has the additional benefit of allowing to explicitly request OpenBSD-specific checks even on manuals that contain bogus .Os arguments. In cases where you don't specify -W but only -Tlint, the system can be picked from .Os, -Ios=, or uname(3) just like it is now. And developers maintaining portable software can simply use mandoc -Tlint -Wstyle to check their own manuals. That's a nice and clear name. > I think this matches the actual hierarchy in practice. There's errors > and warnings at the top. Then there's general style warnings. > Then below that there's the local system specific style guidelines. > It's a matter of perspective, but the portable warnings aren't subset > of style, rather the system warnings are a superset of style. Makes sense. Thanks, Ingo
