Hi, On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 6:41 PM G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > At 2023-07-10T15:59:28+0200, Tomáš Golembiovský wrote: > > I believe Alex's preference in the Linux man-pages project is to > document what is actually implemented, not to repeat normative language > (paraphrased or not) from the POSIX standard. > > So glibc should be tested to verify the behavior it actually exhibits, > and the language above then updated to describe that, noting any > deviation from POSIX's prescription. At least when Michael Kerrisk was the man-pages maintainer, he would usually ask for a test program proving that the documentation change is correct and / or a pointer to the kernel / libc code, where the behavior could be (hopefully) inferred. I think this is valuable, it makes it easier to track why a certain change was made, and how the behavior was observed at that time. If running the same test case after X years yields a different behavior, it's clear the change that it triggered no longer stands. It's also fair, I think: the burden of proof is on the person suggesting the change. Just my 2 cents, Stefan. > > The same can, optionally, be done for other libcs like musl. > > Alex, please correct me if I'm mistaken. > > Regards, > Branden
