On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 07:16:28AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > >> >> I think the idea of your patch is good, but I prefer to use a word > >> >> other than "deprecated". The problem is that "deprecated" implies a > >> >> standards body or a vendor made a formal statement about this. It's > >> >> true that LSB 2.1 says that wait3() is deprecated > >> >> (http://refspecs.linuxbase.org/LSB_2.1.0/LSB-generic/LSB-generic/baselib-wait3-3.html), > >> >> but wait4() is currently still part of LSB. So, I applied a slightly > >> >> > >> >> modified version of your test: > >> >> > >> >> [[ > >> >> These functions are nonstandard; use > >> >> > >> >> .BR waitpid (2) > >> >> or > >> >> .BR waitid (2) > >> >> in new programs. > >> >> ]] > >> >> > >> >> Seem okay? > >> > > >> > the wait3() function is not "nonstandard, since as the URL you gave > >> > correctly states it is part of SuSv2 (and also of SuSv1). > >> > >> Yep, but marked LEGACY in SUSv2, and removed altogether in SUSv3. So, > >> not part of contemporary standard. (BTW, I did also add text under > >> CONFORMING TO to note those details.) So, I think I'll leave the text > >> as I gave already, unless you have a better alternative to propose. > > > > My problem is with the word "nonstandard" for wait3(), that was > > specified in older standards. > > > > What about "obsolete" instead? > > Okay -- done! Thanks! > Cheers, > > Michael cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
