On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 02:23:52AM +0000, David M. Wilson wrote: > On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 11:27:09PM +0000, Lusercop wrote: > > 6 - Games > The maddest bit of it all is that games have their own man page section > -- even on commercial unixes. What the hell?
I don't suspect it was a particularly thick section in the original UPM. > I mean, take section 2 for instance, it could be split up. Then take 3, OK, I'm going to bite, what do you think the split should be for section 2? I can think of a few, but they'd end up with stupid little sections, and I'm not sure that that's helpful. After all, where do you put functions like select(2) which have been used variously as an alternative to nanosleep(2), and obviously is often used in non-blocking sockets, and is occasionally used with blocking systems too. It's certainly better than alarm(2) for doing sub-second timeouts. Bear in mind also that the original UNIXes (certainly my copy of Lions' v6), from which the UPM derives had many fewer syscalls than we see in modern UNIXes. A lack of networking significantly reduces them, and you can forget all the SysVSHM stuff. > it _needs_ split up, but oooh no, we hvae man(6), using up 10% of the Section 3 I'd definitely agree with, but we already have that to some extent. There's 3x for X functions, for example, and n for Tcl. The question really is how you arrange it: after all, on platforms where libresolv is not a part of the libc, should res_init(3) and friends go in some subsection of 3 or 3 itself. This becomes more and more difficult, and has become worse as people have been adding more and more to the libc core functionality. (Again brought about to a large extent by the advent of BSD networking). > namespace for games ! I don't think it really is 10%, though. It's a lot smaller than that, perhaps 1/62 or so. -- Lusercop.net - LARTing Lusers everywhere since 2002
