Re: [PATCH 2/2] multipath-tools: add mandoc check to man pages

[Xose Vazquez Perez <xose.vazquez@gmail.com>]

On 10/10/25 1:20 PM, Martin Wilck wrote:

> On Fri, 2025-10-10 at 11:22 +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
>> Cc: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
>> Cc: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarzins@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Christophe Varoqui <christophe.varoqui@opensvc.com>
>> Cc: DM_DEVEL-ML <dm-devel@lists.linux.dev>
>> Signed-off-by: Xose Vazquez Perez <xose.vazquez@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>   kpartx/kpartx.8                                | 1 +
>>   libmpathpersist/mpath_persistent_reserve_in.3  | 1 +
>>   libmpathpersist/mpath_persistent_reserve_out.3 | 1 +
>>   mpathpersist/mpathpersist.8.in                 | 5 +++--
>>   multipath/multipath.8.in                       | 5 +++--
>>   multipath/multipath.conf.5.in                  | 5 +++--
>>   multipathd/multipathc.8                        | 1 +
>>   multipathd/multipathd.8.in                     | 5 +++--
>>   8 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kpartx/kpartx.8 b/kpartx/kpartx.8
>> index ef8051a5..2a55c96b 100644
>> --- a/kpartx/kpartx.8
>> +++ b/kpartx/kpartx.8
>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
>>   .\" Make sure there are no errors with:
>>   .\" groff -z -wall -b -e -t kpartx/kpartx.8
>>   .\" man --warnings -E UTF-8 -l -Tutf8 -Z  kpartx/kpartx.8 >
>> /dev/null
>> +.\" mandoc -W all -T lint kpartx/kpartx.8

> Nack. We don't need this in every man page. Actually, we don't need the
> other command lines mentioned in the man pages, either. While looking
> at this, I realize that the "groff" command line is wrong. AFAICT it
> should be
> 
>     groff -man -z -wall -b -e -t -Tutf8 $MANPAGE_FILE
> 
> But really, it makes no sense to me to have these reminders in every
> man page. If we want to keep our man pages in order (which is of course
> a worthwhile goal), we should rather write a GitHub workflow to check
> them. That would be a helpful contribution.
> 
> I would still question whether our man pages need to pass 3 different
> commands. AFAICS the "groff" and "man" commands are basically
> equivalent anyway, as "man" simply calls "groff" for the parsing and
> formatting. Wrt mandoc in general, see my reply to patch 1/2.
> 
> Regards,
> Martin


I will withdraw this patch. Instead, I will send a new one to
completely remove those groff/man comment lines from all files
to clean them up.