Christoff Humphries <christoff@deadbeef.monster> wrote: > > Marc Espie marc.espie.open...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 01:58:27PM +1100, Jonathan Gray wrote: > > > > > > > > So tldr: `man backtrace` should name the required linker flag > > > > > (-lexecinfo) > > > > > > > > from mdoc(7): > > > > > > > > .\" .Sh LIBRARY > > > > .\" For sections 2, 3, and 9 only. > > > > .\" Not used in OpenBSD. > > > > > > > > note about it not being used added by jmc@ in 2010 > > > > > > > > Only use in base is in libelf. > > > > > > Independently of using LIBRARY or not, functions not in libc > > > should probably mention the library somewhere in the manpage ? > > > > > > It is really surprisingly that programming society managed to get by for > > decades and build an incredible number of things without these details. > > Wow. > > > > What really happened is the people (or person) who needs to find what > > they needs to find, always finds it really damn quickly because it is > > already domain-knowledge in the area they are working, they edit a > > Maefile, and carry on. Once it is encoded into the Makefile ,note it is > > usually the same value on every operating system and if it isn't we all > > know make(1) doesn't read manual pages. That Makefile gets copied > > around to other systems. People pass on the domain knowledge > > organically. > > > > There's really no drama here. > > > > However, adding 3 lines (including the blank) to a ton of manuals, that > > is drama. Because obviously there'll need to be a Task Force to go on > > this Mission and splatter the shit everywhere. > > > > This is not like lines describing #include files, because those are > > different for every function in every manual page. > > > > So I personally think it is a fools errand. > > So because it has always been done that way and people got by then it > is not worth it to document development manual pages for developers > with pertinent information they would need for development? That seems > like a foolish argument and logic, and perhaps the worst anti-pattern. > > But this isn't my circus. Seems an odd hill to stand on.
Then why are you standing on that hill?
