linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: bootconfig: Add EBNF syntax file

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]

Message-ID: <2390b729-1b0b-26b5-66bc-92e40e3467b1@web.de>
Date:   Thu, 27 Feb 2020 20:53:03 +0100
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: bootconfig: Add EBNF syntax file

Thanks for such a contribution.

> Add an extended Backus–Naur form (EBNF) syntax file for

Can it matter to mention the specific file format specification version
which should be applied finally?

Would you like to refer to any standard variant?

> bootconfig so that user can logically understand how they

Wording alternative “… that users can …”?

> can write correct boot configuration file.

Related development tools provide some benefits then, don't they?

…
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/bootconfig.ebnf
…
> +digit = "0" | "1" | "2" | "3" | "4" | "5" | "6" | "7" | "8" | "9" ;

Can the specification of such alternatives (or value ranges) become
more compact (depending on a selected standard)?

…
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/bootconfig.rst
…
> +Here is the boot configuration file syntax written in EBNF.

I suggest to replace the abbreviation “EBNF” by the term “extended Backus–Naur form”
in such a sentence.

Regards,
Markus