linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] docs: Deal with some Sphinx deprecation 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 22 May 2019 07:19:09 -0300
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] docs: Deal with some Sphinx deprecation
 warnings

Em Wed, 22 May 2019 10:36:45 +0300
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com> escreveu:

> On Tue, 21 May 2019, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> > The Sphinx folks are deprecating some interfaces in the upcoming 2.0
> > release; one immediate result of that is a bunch of warnings that show up
> > when building with 1.8.  These two patches make those warnings go away,
> > but at a cost:
> >
> >  - It introduces a couple of Sphinx version checks, which are always
> >    ugly, but the alternative would be to stop supporting versions
> >    before 1.7.  For now, I think we can carry that cruft.  
> 
> Frankly, I'd just require Sphinx 1.7+, available even in Debian stable
> through stretch-backports.

We can raise the bar and force a 1.7 or even 1.8 (Fedora 30 comes
with version 1.8.4), but I would prefer to keep support older versions,
at least while we don't depend on some new features introduced after
the version we're using, and while our extensions won't require a major
rework due to a new version.
> 
> >  - The second patch causes the build to fail horribly on newer
> >    Sphinx installations.  The change to switch_source_input() seems
> >    to make the parser much more finicky, increasing warnings and
> >    eventually failing the build altogether.  In particular, it will
> >    scream about problems in .rst files that are not included in the
> >    TOC tree at all.  The complaints appear to be legitimate, but it's
> >    a bunch of stuff to clean up.  

There is a flag to cleanup the warning about a file not included at
a TOC tree (:orphan:), but it will still try to parse it. There's also
a conf.py way of doing it. For example, you can exclude an entire dir:

	exclude_patterns = ['includes/*.rst']

But using exclude_patterns will likely be too messy.

> I can understand Sphinx complaining that a file is not included in a TOC
> tree, but I don't understand why it goes on to parse them anyway.

Yeah, this is, IMHO, a very bad behavior.

> 
> BR,
> Jani.
> 
> 
> >
> > I've tested these with 1.4 and 1.8, but not various versions in between.
> >
> > Jonathan Corbet (2):
> >   doc: Cope with Sphinx logging deprecations
> >   doc: Cope with the deprecation of AutoReporter
> >
> >  Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  Documentation/sphinx/kernellog.py | 28 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  Documentation/sphinx/kfigure.py   | 38 +++++++++++++-----------
> >  3 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/sphinx/kernellog.py  
> 



Thanks,
Mauro