lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 00/11] Fix some doc build warnings/errors and broken links
Em Thu, 10 May 2018 14:22:35 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> escreveu:

> On Wed, 9 May 2018 10:18:43 -0300
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > Patches 1 to 5 on this series contain the patches that weren't yet
> > applied from the past patch series and touch only at Documentation.
> > There are two changes there:
> > patch 2: fixed the description and added a c/c to cgroup maintainers;
> > patch 4: rewritten according with Louis request, droping several hunks.
>
> Of these, I've applied 2, 4, and 6. The networking and crypto folks like
> to apply their own documentation fixes; I assume they'll pick these up.

Hmm... I'm pretty sure I emailed about patch 4. Luis actually came with
a better solution: he partially removed the note, as it is outdated.
Better to revert it as otherwise it will rise conflicts at -next once
merged.

>
> > Patch 6 rewrites scripts/documentation-file-ref-check on Perl,
> > adding an auto-fix feature.
>
> Applied this one.
>
> > Patches 7 and 8 fix things that would cause troubles for the
> > automatic autocorrection tool.
>
> #7 is applied. #8 doesn't apply, though; I'm not sure which tree you made
> it against? In any case, I've stopped here for now.

Andrea commented about #8. You already applied an identical patch :-)

> > Patch 9 touches a lot of random places (including MAINTAINERS)
> > that contain broken links and can be auto-fixed. It could be
> > broken into one patch per touched file, but I think that is
> > overkill.
>
> Let's keep this one (and the ones that follow) aside. I'm happy to apply
> them, but I think they are best applied as an end-of-merge-window thing. I
> envision lots of conflicts, and I already have a pile of those to explain
> to Linus this time around.

Yeah, this patch touches on a lot of stuff. Better to handle it by the
end of a merge window.

I suspect you'll need to re-generate it by running this command again:

./scripts/documentation-file-ref-check --fix

But you should check the results, as false positives may arise.

If you prefer, I rebased the tree with the pending patches, placing
patch 9 at the end. This way, you'll likely avoid conflicts with
patches 10 and 11.

https://git.linuxtv.org/mchehab/experimental.git/log/?h=broken-links-v4

Thanks,
Mauro

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-10 23:28    [W:0.156 / U:1.712 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site