netdev - Re: [PATCH] Fix grammar in ip-rule(8) man page

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: Fri, 12 May 2023 10:15:12 +0200
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: Bilal Khan <bilalkhanrecovered@...il.com>, majordomo@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix grammar in ip-rule(8) man page

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 08:50:09AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2023 11:15:23 +0200
> Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 01:05:02PM +0500, Bilal Khan wrote:
> > > Hey there,
> > > 
> > > I have identified a small grammatical error in the ip-rule(8) man
> > > page, and have created a patch to fix it. The current first line of
> > > the DESCRIPTION section reads:
> > >   
> > > > ip rule manipulates rules in the routing policy database control the route selection algorithm.  
> > > 
> > > This sentence contains a grammatical error, as "control" should either
> > > be changed to "that controls" (to apply to "database") or "to control"
> > > (to apply to "manipulates"). I have updated the sentence to read:
> > >   
> > > > ip rule manipulates rules in the routing policy database that controls the route selection algorithm.  
> > > 
> > > This change improves the readability and clarity of the ip-rule(8) man
> > > page and makes it easier for users to understand how to use the IP
> > > rule command.
> > > 
> > > I have attached the patch file by the name
> > > "0001-fixed-the-grammar-in-ip-rule-8-man-page.patch" to this email and
> > > would appreciate any feedback or suggestions for improvement.
> > > 
> > > Thank you!  
> > 
> > FWIIW, I'm not sure that an attachment is the right way to submit patches.
> > It's more usual to use something like git send-email or b4 to send
> > basically what is in your attachment.
> > 
> > I'm sure Stephen will provide guidance if he'd like things done a different
> > way.
> 
> Applied and did small fixups. Novices get more leeway in initial patch submissions.
> The main requirements are that it correct, applies clean, and has required DCO.

Yes, of course. Thanks Stephen.