Upstream man-pages maintainer here; I just added tmpfs(5), unaware that it would create a conflict for Debian; I assume the conflicting page is Debian-specific(?). (I don't have such a page on my Fedora system.)
On 13 December 2016 at 10:00, Thorsten Glaser <t.gla...@tarent.de> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Michael Biebl wrote: > >> The tmpfs man page shipped by the manpages package talks about the tmpfs >> file system. >> The man page shipped by initscripts talks about the debian/initscripts >> specific config file /etc/default/tmpfs. >> >> My gut feeling is, that debian specific tmpfs man page should be renamed. > > From the usual unix policy stuff: > > The manpage about /etc/default/tmpfs can be tmpfs(5) as it > covers a configuration file. > > The manpage about the Linux tmpfs should be tmpfs(9) as it > covers a kernel concept (here: a filesystem). Not sure where this idea originates. There is no Section 9 on Linux. And there's certainly precedent for section 5 pages on filesystems. For example, among others, we have ext4(5), btrfs(5), and nfs(5). I'm not sure what the best path forward here is. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
