Bug#574041: [daniel.bal...@gmail.com: man 2 write - clarification]

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

tags 574041 fixed-upstream
thanks

So, I tried to slightly improve the text here, but in a different way.

See the upstream patch below.

Thanks,

Michael

--- a/man2/write.2
+++ b/man2/write.2
@@ -82,9 +82,9 @@ are performed as an atomic step.

 POSIX requires that a
 .BR read (2)
-which can be proved to occur after a
+that can be proved to occur after a
 .BR write ()
-has returned returns the new data.
+has returned will return the new data.
 Note that not all filesystems are POSIX conforming.
 .SH RETURN VALUE
 On success, the number of bytes written is returned (zero indicates


On 26 March 2014 at 08:34, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
 wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Joey Schulze  wrote:
>> Package: manpages-dev
>> Version: 3.24-1
>>
>> Forwarded mail from Daniel.
>>
>> - Forwarded message from Daniel Baluta  -
>>
>> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:48:24 +0200
>> Subject: man 2 write - clarification
>> From: Daniel Baluta 
>> To: ubuntu-devel-disc...@lists.ubuntu.com, j...@debian.org
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The following phrase taken from man 2 write manual page is confusing:
>> POSIX  requires that a read(2) which can be proved to occur after a
>> write() has returned returns the new data.
>>
>> I think you should you some comas to make a clear statement.
>> POSIX  requires that a read(2), which can be proved to occur after a
>> write() has returned, returns the new data.
>
> Adding those comma would change the meaning of the sentence, rendering
> it incorrect.



-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/

Bug#574041: [daniel.bal...@gmail.com: man 2 write - clarification]

[Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Joey Schulze j...@infodrom.org wrote:
 Package: manpages-dev
 Version: 3.24-1

 Forwarded mail from Daniel.

 - Forwarded message from Daniel Baluta daniel.bal...@gmail.com -

 Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:48:24 +0200
 Subject: man 2 write - clarification
 From: Daniel Baluta daniel.bal...@gmail.com
 To: ubuntu-devel-disc...@lists.ubuntu.com, j...@debian.org

 Hello,

 The following phrase taken from man 2 write manual page is confusing:
 POSIX  requires that a read(2) which can be proved to occur after a
 write() has returned returns the new data.

 I think you should you some comas to make a clear statement.
 POSIX  requires that a read(2), which can be proved to occur after a
 write() has returned, returns the new data.

Adding those comma would change the meaning of the sentence, rendering
it incorrect.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#574041: [daniel.bal...@gmail.com: man 2 write - clarification]

[Joey Schulze]

Package: manpages-dev
Version: 3.24-1

Forwarded mail from Daniel.

- Forwarded message from Daniel Baluta daniel.bal...@gmail.com -

Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:48:24 +0200
Subject: man 2 write - clarification
From: Daniel Baluta daniel.bal...@gmail.com
To: ubuntu-devel-disc...@lists.ubuntu.com, j...@debian.org

Hello,

The following phrase taken from man 2 write manual page is confusing:
POSIX  requires that a read(2) which can be proved to occur after a
write() has returned returns the new data.

I think you should you some comas to make a clear statement.
POSIX  requires that a read(2), which can be proved to occur after a
write() has returned, returns the new data.

thanks,
Daniel.

- End forwarded message -

Regards,

Joey

-- 
Ten years and still binary compatible.  -- XFree86

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org