Re: [PATCH] mount: add btrfs to mount.8

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>]

On 6/7/14, 8:41 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 10:52:48AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 6/6/14, 5:03 AM, Karel Zak wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 11:44:28AM +0200, Karel Zak wrote:
>>>>  I personally have no problem to maintain information about arbitrary
>>>>  FS in mount.8, the problem are updates. Unfortunately, kernel FS developers
>>>>  don't care about the man page at all and it's very often not up to date.
>>>
>>>  Hmm.. another possible way would be to create a script for util-linux
>>>  that will analyze kernel Documentation/filesystems/<fsname>.txt and
>>>  report changes that is necessary to make to mount.8. It should be
>>>  relative simple with git. I'll try it..
>>
>> I like that idea.  Maybe <fsname.txt> will need a defined format, though,
>> right?  Maybe asciidoc?
>>
>> I've still been meaning (in theory) to produce a mount manpage just for xfs.
>> I'm still willing to do that if the above doesn't pan out.  I just need
>> to get to it.  I'd be happy to do it for extN as well.
> 
> Autogenerating man pages from an adhoc format sounds like the wrong
> approach.  I'd much rather have proper man paged for every filesystem.
> With those we could also drop all that information from the kernel
> Documentation directory, where users won't looks for them anyway.
> 
> Eric, if you take care of xfs an extN I'll get started on man pages
> for the various "minor" filesystems that don't really have active
> maintainers.

Ok, so I've sent xfs & extN and I am about to send btrfs.

But I still have the nagging feeling that it would be better to have these
mount-option manpages distributed with the kernel, which is ultimately what
they must match.

So although I've sent them all, I'm still feeling unsure about it.  :)

-Eric