Re: Grammar issue in sigwaitinfo(2)

Re: Grammar issue in sigwaitinfo(2)

[Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)]

Hi Chris,

On 4/28/21 9:19 PM, Chris Keilbart wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I’ve noticed a small grammar issue in the sigwaitinfo(2) errors list, 
> specifically in EAGAIN. I’ve seen this on the online page: 
> https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sigwaitinfo.2.html 
> <https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/sigwaitinfo.2.html>.
> 
> It says:
> 
> No signal in set /was became/ pending within the timeout
> 
>                period specified to sigtimedwait().
> 
> It doesn’t make sense to use “was became”, so one of those words should 
> be removed. I suggest dropping the “was”.

Thanks for the report!
Fixed.  I applied the following patch.

Cheers,

Alex

P.S.: Please send plain text email next time.  The mailing list rejected 
your mail for using HTML.

--->8
sigwaitinfo.2: tfix

Fix wording issue introduced in commit
bf1298c9e5053f55dea43e74255dae5ec57f251e.

Reported-by: Chris Keilbart <keilbartchris@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>
---
  man2/sigwaitinfo.2 | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/man2/sigwaitinfo.2 b/man2/sigwaitinfo.2
index 5cd88c557..00bc50485 100644
--- a/man2/sigwaitinfo.2
+++ b/man2/sigwaitinfo.2
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ set to indicate the error.
  .B EAGAIN
  No signal in
  .I set
-was became pending within the
+became pending within the
  .I timeout
  period specified to
  .BR sigtimedwait ().
-- 
2.31.1



-- 
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/