linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs: *-regressions.rst: unify quoting, add missing word

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:03:29 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
 <regressions@...mhuis.info>, Karel Balej <balejk@...fyz.cz>,
 regressions@...ts.linux.dev, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, workflows@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] docs: *-regressions.rst: unify quoting, add missing
 word

"Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
<regressions@...mhuis.info> writes:

> On 28.03.24 20:29, Karel Balej wrote:
>> Quoting of the '"no regressions" rule' expression differs between
>> occurrences, sometimes being presented as '"no regressions rule"'. Unify
>> the quoting using the first form which seems semantically correct or is
>> at least used dominantly, albeit marginally.
>> 
>> One of the occurrences is obviously missing the 'rule' part -- add it.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Karel Balej <balejk@...fyz.cz>
>
> Thx for this:
>
> Reviewed-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>

I've applied this patch; part 2, it seems, is subject to further work so
I have not applied that one.

Thanks,

jon