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: Fri, 3 Jun 2022 19:39:48 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org> Subject: [PATCH 4.14 21/23] docs: submitting-patches: Fix crossref to The canonical patch format From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com> commit 6d5aa418b3bd42cdccc36e94ee199af423ef7c84 upstream. The reference to `explicit_in_reply_to` is pointless as when the reference was added in the form of "#15" [1], Section 15) was "The canonical patch format". The reference of "#15" had not been properly updated in a couple of reorganizations during the plain-text SubmittingPatches era. Fix it by using `the_canonical_patch_format`. [1]: 2ae19acaa50a ("Documentation: Add "how to write a good patch summary" to SubmittingPatches") Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com> Fixes: 5903019b2a5e ("Documentation/SubmittingPatches: convert it to ReST markup") Fixes: 9b2c76777acc ("Documentation/SubmittingPatches: enrich the Sphinx output") Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v4.9+ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/64e105a5-50be-23f2-6cae-903a2ea98e18@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> --- Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ as you intend it to. The maintainer will thank you if you write your patch description in a form which can be easily pulled into Linux's source code management -system, ``git``, as a "commit log". See :ref:`explicit_in_reply_to`. +system, ``git``, as a "commit log". See :ref:`the_canonical_patch_format`. Solve only one problem per patch. If your description starts to get long, that's a sign that you probably need to split up your patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists