linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/33] docs: update recommended Sphinx version to 2.4.4

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:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 15:27:29 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/33] docs: update recommended Sphinx version to
 2.4.4

On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 18:48:30 +0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:

> The Sphinx check script is already smart enough to keep
> working, with older versions, warning the users that
> an upgrade is recommended (and explaining how):
> 
> 	Sphinx version 1.7.9
> 	Warning: It is recommended at least Sphinx version 2.4.4.
> 	Detected OS: Fedora release 31 (Thirty One).
> 
> 	To upgrade Sphinx, use:
> 
> 		/usr/bin/virtualenv sphinx_2.4.4
> 		. sphinx_2.4.4/bin/activate
> 		pip install -r ./Documentation/sphinx/requirements.txt

Sigh...that version is all of a month and some old.  I hate to be pushing
people that hard on the upgrade treadmill.

I'm still looking over the set, and will probably apply this, but I think
we should consider tweaking this before 5.8:

 - Can we make the warning more explicit that 2.4.4 is needed *if you are
   generating PDF*?  Most people, I think, don't do that, and can live
   happily with an older version.

 - Perhaps the time has come to raise the lower bound to, say, 1.7?  That
   might let us get rid of a bit of cruft.

Thanks,

jon