inconsistent redundancy in chdir.2

inconsistent redundancy in chdir.2

[Martin Eberhard Schauer]

             Dear Mr. Kerrisk,

I'm sorry for possibly two messages on the same subject - i mistyped the
CC address.

Thank you for maintaining the Linux man-pages.

Updating the outdated translation of chdir.2 for manpages-de I found

>
Feature Test Macro Requirements for glibc (see feature_test_macros(7)):

       fchdir():
           _BSD_SOURCE || _XOPEN_SOURCE >= 500 ||
           _XOPEN_SOURCE && _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED
           || /* Since glibc 2.12: */ _POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 200809L
>

and as last (third) part of NOTES

>
The prototype for fchdir() is only available if _BSD_SOURCE is defined,
       or _XOPEN_SOURCE is defined with the value 500.
>

This is almost the same of the first two possibilities above.

Please check whether >= or = is right and consider dropping/extending
the last
paragraph of the NOTES.

Kind regards
       Martin Schauer


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: inconsistent redundancy in chdir.2

[Michael Kerrisk]

Hello Martin,

On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 11:21 PM, Martin Eberhard Schauer
<Martin.E.Schauer-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>            Dear Mr. Kerrisk,
>
> thank you for maintaining the Linux man-pages.

You're welcome!

> Updating the outdated translation of chdir.2 for manpages-de I found
>
> Feature Test Macro Requirements for glibc (see feature_test_macros(7)):
>
>      fchdir():
>          _BSD_SOURCE || _XOPEN_SOURCE >= 500 ||
>          _XOPEN_SOURCE && _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED
>          || /* Since glibc 2.12: */ _POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 200809L
>>
>
> and as last (third) part of NOTES
>
>>
> The prototype for fchdir() is only available if _BSD_SOURCE is defined,
>      or _XOPEN_SOURCE is defined with the value 500.
>>
>
> This is almost the same of the first two possibilities above.
>
> Please check whether >= or = is right and consider dropping/extending the
> last
> paragraph of the NOTES.

Thanks for reporting this. The piece in notes is redundannt and
incorrect, and as you suggest, I removed it, for man-pages-3.32.




-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Author of "The Linux Programming Interface"; http://man7.org/tlpi/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html