linux-kernel - Re: [DOC] Missing completions-design.txt?

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:11:26 +0000
From:   Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [DOC] Missing completions-design.txt?

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:50:01PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It looks like Nicholas submitted this doc a while back as patch 2/2:
> 
> "[PATCH 2/2] doc: detailed documentation for completion"
> http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1412.2/03676.html
> 
> where patch 1/2 got merged as this:
> 
> 202799be447b doc: brief user documentation for completion
> 
> References in the introduced completion.txt doc have pointed lost souls
> at an elusive completion-design.txt:
> 
>   "for details on completion design and implementation see
>   completions-design.txt"
> 
> Since as we well know, most developers are religious readers of
> documentation, presumably there are people out there waiting expectantly
> for such a file to appear in their otherwise exhaustive Documentation/.
> Can you help such lost souls out?
>
If I remember correctly it was Jonathan Corbet that suggested to merge the
two and atleast the usage part got merged in the current completion.txt 
The path descriptions were not included as it was not clear how long such
a path documentation would actually hold - so that was deliberately dropped
The design goals/rational was more or less lost or not seen as relevant here
as were the references/history and RT notes. As far as I remember it was a
deliberate decision to drop these parts as they were not seen to be necessary.

Those missing bits could be merged into the current completion.txt I do not
think it makes much sense to have it in a seperate file.

thx!
hofrat