Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 15:49:30 -0700
From: Stan Shebs<stanshebs@earthlink.net>
I tend to favor "info os<type> <subtype>..." because it fits the
progressive refinement that is a hallmark of GDB commands - the user can
remember it as "info, and it's OS-related, but I just want semaphores".
The user doesn't have to consider what OS name might be expected, "os"
always works to connect to the class of OS-specific info displays.
However, we also have an alternate tradition of "info<target>
<type>...", including "info dos", "info w32", "info spu", etc. By that
tradition, Linux-specific info should be "info linux", and if there were
BSD OS info, it would be "info bsd", and so forth. It's simpler to
document, because the manual can just have a section for each subcommand
that enumerates the subsubcommands that are available. Unfortunately
for consistency, we've also had "info os" for several years.