Your message dated Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:35:39 -0500
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line fixed in recent uploads of manpages
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 9 Sep 2003 09:37:43 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Sep 09 04:37:38 2003
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from smtp.tiscali.ch [212.40.5.52]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 19wewK-0003h2-00; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:37:36 -0500
Received: from tpo2.sourcepole (adsl-35-83-fixip.tiscali.ch [212.254.35.83])
by smtp.tiscali.ch (8.11.7/8.11.7) with ESMTP id h899bZg16714;
Tue, 9 Sep 2003 11:37:35 +0200
Received: from tpo by tpo2.sourcepole with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 19wewH-0000TH-00; Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:37:33 +0200
From: Tomas Pospisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: manpages: please include pty(4) manpage
X-Mailer: reportbug 1.50
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:37:33 +0200
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: Tomas Pospisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.0 required=4.0
tests=HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_8_27
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_8_27
(1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: manpages
Version: 1.60-2
Severity: wishlist
Please include the pty(4) manpage. I suggest taking the one from
FreeBSD [1]. Since I'm not knowledgeable in the concept of pty's
I can not tell whether all the IOCTLS apply and if the semantics
are the same. However it is useful to have a manpage that explains
the general concept.
So I suggest:
* either taking the manpage as is from FreeBSD
* or adding a comment at the top of that manpage saying that it
comes from FreeBSD and that not all options may apply and
inviting people to fix this if they know better.
Additionaly references shold be made from the [open|close|...]pty
pages to the pty(4) page.
If you conceed with either of the two options above I can do the
rest of the work - please let me know.
*t
[1]
http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=pty&sektion=4&apropos=0&manpath=FreeBSD+5.1-current
-- System Information
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux tpo2 2.4.20 #1 SMP Mon Apr 28 18:25:17 CEST 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 209323-done) by bugs.debian.org; 22 Nov 2005 16:35:45 +0000
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 22 08:35:45 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from ms-smtp-03.nyroc.rr.com ([24.24.2.57])
by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
id 1Eeb7Q-0005wp-VB; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 08:35:45 -0800
Received: from andromeda (cpe-69-202-136-66.twcny.res.rr.com [69.202.136.66])
by ms-smtp-03.nyroc.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
jAMGZep4000353;
Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:35:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pryzbyj by andromeda with local (Exim 4.54)
id 1Eeb7L-0004Nh-M7; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:35:39 -0500
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:35:39 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Kerrisk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: fixed in recent uploads of manpages
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
From: Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no
version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-CrossAssassin-Score: 14
Version: 2.09-1
These bugs are all reported fixed by the upstream manpages maintainer,
Michael Kerrisk. For my own convenience, I'm marking them all as
"fixed by version 2.09-1", even though some of them are fixed by
earlier uploads. The bug number, correct fixed-in version, and title
are listed below:
#317037 2.06 Difficult to understand in sscanf RETURN VALUE
#315411 2.09 New upstream release: 2.09
#209323 2.09 please include pty(4) manpage
#330877 2.09 read can return EINVAL when using O_DIRECT and buffer not aligned
#321131 2.08 exit.3 missing "is"
#299795 2.07 Some library functions' manpage use wrong hyphen
#295666 2.03 regex.7.gz: The word boundary regexps are unsupported
#326520 2.08 'man msgget' typo: one line not displayed
#306517 2.04 epoll_ctl(2) description differs from implementation
#291121 2.04 flock(2) second time by same process
#323851 2.08 getpwnam.3 manpage should clarify the scope of pw_dir
#323062 2.08 clone(2) CLONE_PARENT_SETTID description incorrect
#101433 2.04 "man setitimer" give bad informations
#113812 2.04 libc6-dev: iconv prototype
#317037 2.06 Difficult to understand in sscanf RETURN VALUE
#219695 2.04 sysconf(3): describes _SC_2_DEV, which doesn't exist
#294890 2.03 Typo in wait(2): "watpid"
--
Clear skies,
Justin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
