On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 07:37:30AM BST, Theo de Raadt wrote: > > > The FAQ gets updated when the new release is out. Not before. > > > > Following that chain of thought, shouldn't manual pages, or any official > > documents referenced in the FAQ for that matter, default to '-release' > > (or '-stable') rather than '-current'? > > They should reference -release or -stable. There really is little > difference between them. We do perhaps a handful of commits to -stable > a release. > > > > People running -current can cope. Really, noone's getting stabbed in > > > the eye. > > > > People running -current, sure. FAQ, however is aimed (or in part at > > least) at people who don't necessarily (yet!) know what '-current' means > > so the current - pun intended ;^) - behaviour is somewhat confusing. > > Correct. > > The FAQ should not document -current. > > That's the common place for keeners, and we love to have lots of keeners. > But everyone has to learn somewhere, and that's the stable footing of > -release.
Thanks for clarifying that, Theo. In that case, all references to manual pages in the FAQ should point to 5.4 (or whatever the '-release' might be) rather than '-current', i.e.: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=dmesg&sektion=8&manpath=OpenBSD+5.4 rather than: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/man.cgi?query=dmesg&sektion=8 Otherwise, we're running into an issue of manual pages having subtle differences between '-release' and '-current' or appear to be missing altogether and that's confusing to anyone reading the FAQ, not only, but especially newcomers. Cheers, Raf P.S. I think we can all live with 'i386' as the "default" arch ;^)
