re: Does "options P1003_1B_SEMAPHORE" still exist?

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

> At the time I filed the PRs they were contested by AD because the libc
> counterparts were already documented, with the syscalls considered the
> private interface.  I personally believe that all syscalls should be
> documented in NetBSD (and recently I have learned that I'm not the only
> one to think they should be, so perhaps I should eventually write these
> manual pages, afterall).

indeed, i'd much rather all the syscalls were documented.


.mrg.