On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 04:48:38PM +0000, Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 10:43:18AM -0500, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 8:27 PM Paul R. Tagliamonte <paul...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Heyya tech@,
> > >
> > > Please keep me on cc, I'm not subscribed
> >
> > Please keep me on cc. The last message wasn't sent to me, so my In-Reply-To
> > is going to be wrong. I'm not subscribed to tech@.
>
> yep, sorry, i didn;t spot that note
>
> > From the web:
> > > some of the relevant flags are already documented in route(8) ("Routes
> > > have associated flags...). the entire list is documented in route(4),
> > > but you have to explicitly ask for it (man 4 route)
> >
> > AFAICT none of these documents which flag "h" maps to, for example.
> >
>
> no, but netstat(8) does.
>
> > > and again the flags with detail in netstat(8) ("The mapping between
> > > letters and flags is...").
> >
> > I will admit I'm not smart enough to think to check netstat(8) when
> > looking at route(8) output, but that's a fair point.
> >
> > I understand netstat.8 documenting flags defined in usr.bin/netstat/show.c,
> > but is the review here that we should instruct users in route.8 to look up
> > the flags coming from sbin/route/show.c in netstat.8 which documents
> > usr.bin/netstat/show.c, not sbin/route/show.c ?
> >
> > I am very sympathetic to the argument that duplicating documentation
> > is bad, and can result in maintenance burden or out of date docs, but
> > surely people would be more likely to update a manpage in the same
> > directory as the file?
> >
> > I'm OK with this going NOTABUG WONTFIX; I did find the right mappings,
> > but I just had to go to the source repo to find it, so I guess
> > selfishly I've got
> > the knowledge I needed. I was just trying to fix a doc bug when I had state
> > in memory, since I know I'd appreciate that as a fellow distro maintainer.
> >
> > paultag
> >
>
> i don;t know why the text is where it is. maybe some of the network
> people can say whether the placement makes sense or not.
In the old world only netstat could show the routing table. I think this
is still the case in FreeBSD for example. We added route show at some
point but the documentation was not shared between the manpages.
I agree that it is annoying to open up the netstat man page to find the
flags shown by route show. For this we added:
Print out the routing table, in a fashion similar to
"netstat -r". The output is documented in more detail
towards the end of the netstat(1) manual.
To the route manpage when describing route show. Not sure if that is
enough or if we should duplicate tables (whith the usual sync problem).
--
:wq Claudio
