* moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
@ 2018-01-19 2:36 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2018-01-19 2:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: util-linux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --]
the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
over 6 years :/.
imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
mount command line options and such should remain.
specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
@ 2018-01-19 2:36 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2018-01-19 2:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: util-linux, linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --]
the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
over 6 years :/.
imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
mount command line options and such should remain.
specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
2018-01-19 2:36 ` Mike Frysinger
@ 2018-01-19 10:12 ` Karel Zak
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Karel Zak @ 2018-01-19 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: util-linux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:36:37PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
> various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
> the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
> the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
> features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
> util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
> up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
> over 6 years :/.
Please, send patch if you see any obsolete stuff in mount.8.
Unfortunately kernel guys (usually) don't care...
> imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
> out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
> mount command line options and such should remain.
I've talked about it (including LKML) many times in last ten years.
> specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
>
> we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
> in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
> and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
>
> thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
> are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
Fortunately, this "move project" is already on the way. The target is
man section 5 and FS specific packages. We already successfully moved
man nfs
man xfs
man ext4 (ext2, ...)
All depends on FS maintainers. I'm going to support arbitrary activity
in this area, but this does not depend on util-linux project.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
@ 2018-01-19 10:12 ` Karel Zak
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Karel Zak @ 2018-01-19 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: util-linux, linux-man
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:36:37PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
> various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
> the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
> the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
> features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
> util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
> up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
> over 6 years :/.
Please, send patch if you see any obsolete stuff in mount.8.
Unfortunately kernel guys (usually) don't care...
> imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
> out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
> mount command line options and such should remain.
I've talked about it (including LKML) many times in last ten years.
> specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
>
> we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
> in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
> and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
>
> thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
> are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
Fortunately, this "move project" is already on the way. The target is
man section 5 and FS specific packages. We already successfully moved
man nfs
man xfs
man ext4 (ext2, ...)
All depends on FS maintainers. I'm going to support arbitrary activity
in this area, but this does not depend on util-linux project.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread[parent not found: <20180119101245.5umnbe6koa22hneh-xkT7n84Rsxv/9pzu0YdTqQ@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
2018-01-19 10:12 ` Karel Zak
@ 2018-01-19 18:24 ` Mike Frysinger
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2018-01-19 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Karel Zak
Cc: util-linux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA,
linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2100 bytes --]
On 19 Jan 2018 11:12, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:36:37PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
> > various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
> > the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
> > the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
> > features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
> > util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
> > up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
> > over 6 years :/.
>
> Please, send patch if you see any obsolete stuff in mount.8.
> Unfortunately kernel guys (usually) don't care...
>
> > imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
> > out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
> > mount command line options and such should remain.
>
> I've talked about it (including LKML) many times in last ten years.
>
> > specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
> > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
> >
> > we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
> > in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
> > and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
> >
> > thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
> > are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
>
> Fortunately, this "move project" is already on the way. The target is
> man section 5 and FS specific packages. We already successfully moved
>
> man nfs
> man xfs
> man ext4 (ext2, ...)
if you're OK with that direction, then that makes sense to me
> All depends on FS maintainers. I'm going to support arbitrary activity
> in this area, but this does not depend on util-linux project.
man-pages is a community project, so i don't think that's entirely
accurate. but i'll just send more deletion updates for util-linux.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages
@ 2018-01-19 18:24 ` Mike Frysinger
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mike Frysinger @ 2018-01-19 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Karel Zak; +Cc: util-linux, linux-man
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2100 bytes --]
On 19 Jan 2018 11:12, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 09:36:37PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > the mount(8) man page covers not only the mount command, but also the
> > various file system options that come from the kernel. it seems like
> > the communities have settled on the man-pages project for holding all
> > the userland-facing documentation, it has good practices for tracking
> > features across versions, and updating it is a lot easier/safer (than
> > util-linux) and up-to-date on the web (via man7.org). while looking
> > up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by
> > over 6 years :/.
>
> Please, send patch if you see any obsolete stuff in mount.8.
> Unfortunately kernel guys (usually) don't care...
>
> > imo, it seems like we should move all kernel-specific documentation
> > out of the util-linux project and into man-pages. obviously all the
> > mount command line options and such should remain.
>
> I've talked about it (including LKML) many times in last ten years.
>
> > specifically i'm looking at "FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC MOUNT OPTIONS":
> > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mount.8.html#FILESYSTEM-SPECIFIC_MOUNT_OPTIONS
> >
> > we probably want to leave "FILESYSTEM-INDEPENDENT MOUNT OPTIONS"
> > in util-linux since those are all parsed by util-linux's mount
> > and turned into the MS_xxx bits.
> >
> > thoughts ? mount(2) doesn't seem like the best place, but these
> > are the fields that go in the "data" string to that syscall.
>
> Fortunately, this "move project" is already on the way. The target is
> man section 5 and FS specific packages. We already successfully moved
>
> man nfs
> man xfs
> man ext4 (ext2, ...)
if you're OK with that direction, then that makes sense to me
> All depends on FS maintainers. I'm going to support arbitrary activity
> in this area, but this does not depend on util-linux project.
man-pages is a community project, so i don't think that's entirely
accurate. but i'll just send more deletion updates for util-linux.
-mike
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2018-01-19 18:24 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2018-01-19 2:36 moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages Mike Frysinger
2018-01-19 2:36 ` Mike Frysinger
2018-01-19 10:12 ` Karel Zak
2018-01-19 10:12 ` Karel Zak
[not found] ` <20180119101245.5umnbe6koa22hneh-xkT7n84Rsxv/9pzu0YdTqQ@public.gmane.org>
2018-01-19 18:24 ` Mike Frysinger
2018-01-19 18:24 ` Mike Frysinger
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.