cvs commit: src/share/man/man4/man4.i386 ct.4

[non at ever.sanda.gr.jp]

From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 07:35:14 -0700 (MST)
> : > >Maybe just a simple note in non-san's ct.4 man page would solve this
> : > >for now, and a greater attention to avoid clashes in the future.
> : > >
> : > Why not to create man4.pc98?
> : 
> : I am not sure here, but my guess is, we have several man pages which
> : are shared between i386/i386 and i386/pc98. So if we just create
> : man4.pc98 just like other architectures, we will have to copy and
> : maintain those pages.
> 
> We can easily 'reach over' in the Makefile for man4.pc98 for the list
> of things that's shared.

OK, I now understand how to do it. 

I am not against creating man4.pc98 and I am preparing for
it. However, I prefer the name `ctau.4' since we are using the name
in, 
- sys/dev/`ctau'
- sys/dev/`ctau'.c
- device line in sys/i386/conf/NOTES
and so on. People who don't know about ctau will want to see ctau.4
not ct.4. People who do know adding the `device ctau' line  in the
conf file don't need the manual page or want to see ctau.4. People who
know `ct' in Linux can easily search NOTES or do `man -k' by `ct' or
the name of the hardware. I also think we should change the name in
sys/conf/majors too. 

Second reason is that we should not use the same name for the
different drivers in FreeBSD. It is confusing and may cause
confliction as nyan-san suggests.

Although, Warner-san wrote both are `nitch' device, the SCSI cards
which ct driver supoort are not `nitch' device. They are major devices
for pc98. Since first one (original one from NEC) was introduced in
the early days of PC-9801 series and they are used as the only SCSI
supporting host adapters for years. 

// Noriaki Mitsunaga //