linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] docs: process: fix typos in Documentation/process/backporting.rst

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: <56c6883e-26e6-4cc4-b731-337c454ce411@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 09:26:14 +0200
From: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>
To: Aryabhatta Dey <aryabhattadey35@...il.com>, corbet@....net,
        workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: process: fix typos in
 Documentation/process/backporting.rst


On 25/08/2024 13:33, Aryabhatta Dey wrote:
> Change 'submiting' to 'submitting', 'famliar' to 'familiar' and
> 'appared' to 'appeared'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aryabhatta Dey <aryabhattadey35@...il.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/process/backporting.rst | 6 +++---
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/backporting.rst b/Documentation/process/backporting.rst
> index e1a6ea0a1e8a..a71480fcf3b4 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/backporting.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/backporting.rst
> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Once you have the patch in git, you can go ahead and cherry-pick it into
>   your source tree. Don't forget to cherry-pick with ``-x`` if you want a
>   written record of where the patch came from!
>   
> -Note that if you are submiting a patch for stable, the format is
> +Note that if you are submitting a patch for stable, the format is
>   slightly different; the first line after the subject line needs tobe

There's another one here: "tobe"

>   either::
>   
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ divergence.
>   It's important to always identify the commit or commits that caused the
>   conflict, as otherwise you cannot be confident in the correctness of
>   your resolution. As an added bonus, especially if the patch is in an
> -area you're not that famliar with, the changelogs of these commits will
> +area you're not that familiar with, the changelogs of these commits will
>   often give you the context to understand the code and potential problems
>   or pitfalls with your conflict resolution.
>   
> @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ git blame
>   Another way to find prerequisite commits (albeit only the most recent
>   one for a given conflict) is to run ``git blame``. In this case, you
>   need to run it against the parent commit of the patch you are
> -cherry-picking and the file where the conflict appared, i.e.::
> +cherry-picking and the file where the conflict appeared, i.e.::
>   
>       git blame <commit>^ -- <path>
>   

Thanks for these fixes.

Reviewed-by: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>


Vegard