cvs commit: src/share/man/man7 security.7 src/sbin/init init.8

[Gary W. Swearingen]

Hiroki Sato <hrs at FreeBSD.org> writes:

> "Gary W. Swearingen" <garys at FreeBSD.org> wrote

> ga>   Files used both "securelevel" and either "secure level" or
> ga>   "security level"; all are now "security level".
>
>  Did we all agree with using "security level" instead of "secure level"?
>  "secure level" is still used as a manual page alias (securelevel(8)),
>  a sysctl MIB, and in other docs in doc/en_US.ISO8859-1, so I am afraid
>  people will be confused.

It sounds like we're not going to agree.  But if we're going to
standardize on ugly jargon, let's go all the way and make it
"securelevel" so it's obvious that it's ugly jargon imposed on the
documentation by the MIB, and not just ugly English, more so in some
places than others.

(Note that the two pages I was working on were both going to use
multiple versions and I simply choose the one I liked to standardize
within the page.)

In 5.4,
   10 manpages use 'security level' in 34 lines.
   1 manpage uses 'secure level' in 6 lines.
   15 (about) manpages use 'securelevel' as a word maybe 20-25 times
      but some might be using short-hand for the MIB.
   Other manpages use the MIB, kern.securelevel.