Better paths in documentation

[Russ Allbery]

Julien ÉLIE <julien at trigofacile.com> writes:
> En réponse à Russ Allbery :

>> Anything that can be configured in inn.conf should probably still use
>> the inn.conf option names.

> But then, where full paths should be used?  Only in "scripts" or samples?
> Otherwise, it would also be possible to write:
>     su -news -c <pathbin>/rc.news

> And there would be no need for .in POD/man pages.

I think there are only a few places that aren't controlled by the inn.conf
options.  One of them is the path to inn.conf, which is referenced in
various places and which should have a hard-coded path.

> By the way, I have always wondered what was the best writing for
> I<pathetc>/active;  is it that one, or I<pathetc>/F<active> or
> F<I<pathetc>/active> or F<< <pathetc>/active >>, or..?

Well, in theory it would be F<I<pathetc>/active> to be fully correct, but
in practice, that results in weird markup.  So I usually use
I<pathetc>/active, which highlights the part that's the variable.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra at stanford.edu)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

    Please send questions to the list rather than mailing me directly.
     <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/questions.html> explains why.