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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:15:16 +0200 From: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net> Cc: Gerrit Huizenga <gh@...ibm.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Kunai, Takashi" <kunai@...ux-foundation.jp>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lf_kernel_messages@...ux-foundation.org, mtk-manpages@....net, jack@...e.cz, randy.dunlap@...cle.com, gregkh@...e.de, pavel@....cz, tim.bird@...sony.com, arjan@...radead.org, sam@...nborg.org, jengelh@...putergmbh.de, joe@...ches.com, auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com, hansendc@...ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, kenistoj@...ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Documentation of kernel messages (Summary) Hi Rob, On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 12:12 -0400, Rob Landley wrote: [snip] > > Yeah, but it seems like having a translations directory in the kernel > > avoids that problem - anyone can update, it is a single source, no digging > > for sites that aren't tied to the kernel, available in the distros > > directly, etc. > > No. It doesn't help. > > 99% of the kernel directory is C. That means any random passerby can review > code. Everyone who has the kernel tarball should be able to review code > that's in there, plus when you compile it breaks. So merging _code_ into the > kernel helps keep it up to date. > > Merging documentation into the kernel doesn't help keep it up to date, because > documentation being out of date doesn't break the build. It may get the > documentation more review, but the existing state of Documentation/* argues > against that. It's a struggle to keep the english versions on the same > continent as "up to date" or "complete", and most of the _good_ documentation > is out in OLS papers and such (which I'm off indexing as we speak). With the checker tool, which we suggested in the initial proposal, it is possible to verify * that every marked message has a description * that there are no descriptions without corresponding messages * that format strings of message and description match So when compiling the kernel using C=1, you will at least see warnings, when a message has changed or a message disappeared: >> make modules C=1 CHK include/linux/version.h CHK include/linux/utsrelease.h CHECK drivers/kmsgtest/kmsgtest.c drivers/kmsgtest/kmsgtest.c: Missing description for: kmsgtest.1 drivers/kmsgtest/kmsgtest.c: Description without message for: kmsgtest.3 Michael - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists