[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#12530: nice(1) man page, bad wording
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
bug#12530: nice(1) man page, bad wording |
Date: |
Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:46:29 +0200 |
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 09/28/2012 02:25 PM, Voelker, Bernhard wrote:
>> David Diggles wrote (Friday, September 28, 2012 4:45 AM)
>>
>>> DESCRIPTION
>>> Run COMMAND with an adjusted niceness, which affects process
>>> scheduling. With no COMMAND, print the current niceness. Nicenesses
>>> range from -20
>>> (most favorable scheduling) to 19 (least favorable).
>>>
>>> Favorable to what? It really does not explain, since it can be
>>> interpreted in opposite ways. Please use words like higher and lower
>>> priority.
>>
>> Hello to Brisbane!
>>
>> Thanks for the report.
>>
>> "Favorable" means the kernel will favor this process before
>> it will take "least favorable" processes into account for
>> scheduling.
>>
>> I don't think the words "higher"/"lower" will bring clarity
>> to it, maybe it'd even be worse because a higher nice number
>> leads to lower priority.
>>
>> What about a stronger term like "aggressive scheduling"?
>
> Well with relative terms, it's best to state what they're relative to,
> so I'll apply something like this, as the wording is ambiguous.
>
> thanks!
> Pádraig.
>
> diff --git a/src/nice.c b/src/nice.c
> index 1a90320..12d0b0f 100644
> --- a/src/nice.c
> +++ b/src/nice.c
> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ usage (int status)
> printf (_("\
> Run COMMAND with an adjusted niceness, which affects process scheduling.\n\
> With no COMMAND, print the current niceness. Nicenesses range from\n\
> -%d (most favorable scheduling) to %d (least favorable).\n\
> +%d (least favorable to the system) to %d (least favorable to the process).\n\
> \n\
> -n, --adjustment=N add integer N to the niceness (default 10)\n\
> "),
Thanks!
Here's an additional patch to avoid something I noticed in the context.
Using "niceness" is bad enough without cementing the ugliness by using a
plural form.
>From 0d4efc37133820c5571316d0ebdf341270e712a4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jim Meyering <address@hidden>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 18:42:05 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] doc: correct an old bit of ugliness in nice --help output
* src/nice.c (usage): s/Nicenesses/Niceness values/
---
src/nice.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/nice.c b/src/nice.c
index 7402b9e..f13be63 100644
--- a/src/nice.c
+++ b/src/nice.c
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ usage (int status)
printf (_("Usage: %s [OPTION] [COMMAND [ARG]...]\n"), program_name);
printf (_("\
Run COMMAND with an adjusted niceness, which affects process scheduling.\n\
-With no COMMAND, print the current niceness. Nicenesses range from\n\
+With no COMMAND, print the current niceness. Niceness values range from\n\
%d (most favorable to the process) to %d (least favorable to the process).\n\
\n\
-n, --adjustment=N add integer N to the niceness (default 10)\n\
--
1.7.12.1.382.gb0576a6