Re: Fixing 2.6.0's broken documentation references

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Hans Ulrich Niedermann <linux-kernel@n-dimensional.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
> I've noted that 2.6.0 contains broken references to documentation.
> 
> I got sufficiently annoyed chasing doc files in the wrong place
> that I wrote a script to check the references to documentation
> files.
> 
> Some documentation files have moved (e.g. Documentation/modules.txt
> to Documentation/kbuild/modules.txt). I adapted the references with a
> script. Patch attached.

Thanks.

> I couldn't find a maintainer for the documentation, the -doc lists are
> dead, so I ask here whether such patches stand a chance to be included
> into the main kernel tree.
> 
> If yes, I'd like to do some more work as described below.
> 
> 1. How to consistently reference to doc files?
> 
>    a) "linux/Documentation/"
>       Still used in some places, but seems to be obsolete, as the top
>       directory is now called "linux-${VERSION}".
> 
>    b) "../../Documentation/foo/bar.txt"
>       There are also places where relative pathes are used. This takes
>       extra space and "Documentation/" should be well-known anyway.
> 
>    c) "Documentation/"
>       Most commonly used. Probably the way to go.

Yes, c).

> 2. Some files have been removed (examples: Configure.help, smp.tex).
>    Fixing this requires manual rewrite of
>    a) code comments
>    b) kbuild help
>    c) Documentation files

We can live with that.  If someone cares enough, they'll fix it.

> 3. Now that I have written a script to scan the source tree, I could
>    also start checking for broken references to http:// and ftp://
>    URLs if desirable.

That wouldn't hurt.