On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 02:26:19PM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote: > > > hmm. i would argue that it's more rightly fw_update(8)'s place > > to go into that level of detail, not pkg_add(1). > > The pkg_add(1) manual does talk about PKG_PATH later on, > so mentioning that a specific class of packages has their > own repository doesn't seem off-topic when specifically talking > about those packages. > > Besides, when documenting one tool and pointing to another one, > mentioning that the latter is just just a wrapper around the > former wouldn't qualifiy as excessive detail in my book. >
it is excessive in a comparative sense. since fw_update(8) does not document at any level the fact that it is a wrapper for pkg_add, having pkg_add document what fw_update is is odd. jmc
