linux-kernel - Re: make htmldocs on linux-next failed with warnings.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 06 Aug 2015 23:39:58 +0100
From:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:	Masanari Iida <standby24x7@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lunar@...ian.org
Subject: Re: make htmldocs on linux-next failed with warnings.

On Thu, 2015-08-06 at 12:43 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 08:31:59 -0600
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 15:28:56 +0100
> > Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 23:22 +0900, Masanari Iida wrote:  
> > > > make htmldocs on linux-next have some parser warnings.
> > > > Following commit cause the warning.    
> > > 
> > > Yes it has warnings but they should be non-fatal.  
> > 
> > Even so, we don't really want to be adding warnings to the build.
> > Hopefully it shouldn't be too hard to fix these...?
> 
> So I've not heard any further on this.

Sorry about that.  I didn't forget about it but didn't have a good idea
how to fix it.

> I think at this point I'm going
> to revert the patch in question; adding warnings for everybody is just
> not the right thing to do.  The other patches in the series can stay.

OK.

> Having spent some time pondering on the issue, I've also concluded that
> this isn't quite the right solution to the problem.  Better, I think, to
> have docproc filter out the duplicates directly, and to direct the output
> to a different file type (.fxml, say).  Otherwise the .xml files can have
> two different things depending on which type of docs was built first,
> leading possibly to other formats being built with missing stuff.
> 
> I may hack together a solution along these lines, just because I do think
> that the reproducible builds goal is an important one.  But I've got a
> *bunch* of other stuff that I have to get done, so I'm not quite sure
> when I can get to it.

I've now thought of another approach, which is to keep the duplicates
during the build process and de-duplicate when installing.  I've just
sent a patch along those lines.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Sturgeon's Law: Ninety percent of everything is crap.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (812 bytes)