linux-kernel - Re: Kernel docs: muddying the waters a bit

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:	Tue, 16 Feb 2016 09:08:03 -0700
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>
Subject: Re: Kernel docs: muddying the waters a bit

On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:25:49 +0200
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com> wrote:

> However I didn't think Sphinx could produce docbook, and a quick search
> doesn't convince me otherwise. Do you have some links to back this up?

Somehow I was really sure of it, but I'm not finding it now.  There is an
extension out there, but it warns about being a "work in progress," so
I'm not sure we can count it.

Whether this is a show-stopper is indeed a good question.  I doubt many
people wanted the DocBook for its own sake, it's a matter of where you
can go from there.  But yes, it would be good to be sure on this point.

> Sphinx might offer a way to drop docproc through the extension
> mechanism, without resorting to the "separate-file approach". It might
> be a more sensible approach as a whole.

There's a certain elegance to it that I like, but it is an idea that
needs to actually be demonstrated.  It could also come later on, though,
with the docproc or include mechanisms used for now.

Thanks,

jon