From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 95186236442 for ; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 13:05:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750424746; cv=none; b=kMrtaPMWYFdVP76/xtdA7Y7X6256s/lnQEl2HFfANwrxMIBUQu8KR+8sf5oKxhD5FIMz1e/M3wWqo1Uue5jDQU4XTELMweg9x4YEbhYi3+5RYJAb8EA9S9Wez1UY/NGQv8QLynIK5Jrqvsjd/lgEIK8zPEl/QFO+8Q6H4JxUNDY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750424746; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qmCqg2hFZAcbNw/u9O3xPXu9VQvRIl9eCn09TUpjt/o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bmU9mCy0LZH4BB32rT+0+GG9TchVgWFCLlfz+C1TuB48Cq5BWgIawgR6cL/ihJ1SJCEKtjOjLr7GJ1AXffOWYIRnVhBKpwZkUfUI+qHqSkzvh6tRrTd8YR77CP4i3yDQBpTGgxqPXj5YNAmbxcE+nhVNM3HWxsFtNy7ehJTpg+o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lSUM9X9p; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="lSUM9X9p" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7BBD3C4CEE3; Fri, 20 Jun 2025 13:05:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1750424746; bh=qmCqg2hFZAcbNw/u9O3xPXu9VQvRIl9eCn09TUpjt/o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lSUM9X9pgm+MV5FaPmnOl7qQWeniag8hidvAB+cbZESY6zYvAw4H/e4z9a1sOTa2d VIFOyF5hiaG7O7bbWvwAswlXtgHfSBxuZleruwb2mrXfpNhxzmLQn65q9uK9F3ZnJq Wl/nGG7dJQuhMNj4Q0Yx/eIst6HoQxMsWhIuliJAMxCOpmN6ZDkYZ/dIEWQJ91dYLj ZTG/OQF26T51ix9EJH2yjN3hVHrEvnAKHaXWiczfzv7lLn+7dgvSkUwfjp/nCE4Bff Nm3azososPT0FVbl/BQUUmpqfuPhp0Ul8NDl+O8zAxm0YsfplEW9pURB63tKo523wm YIKSWGpZ5hGPg== Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 15:05:39 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Akira Yokosawa Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: docs: sphinx: avoid using the deprecated node.set_class() Message-ID: <20250620150406.3e2291c2@sal.lan> In-Reply-To: <528f0354-1869-4cfe-b71d-fe169b2bfc76@gmail.com> References: <87wm97fmn3.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <03285fe4-61f5-429f-9535-5c826536d4b7@gmail.com> <20250620094430.212779e5@foz.lan> <528f0354-1869-4cfe-b71d-fe169b2bfc76@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.49; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Em Fri, 20 Jun 2025 20:14:57 +0900 Akira Yokosawa escreveu: > Mauro! > > On Fri, 20 Jun 2025 09:44:30 +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:22:48 +0900 > > Akira Yokosawa escreveu: > > > [...] > > > > > I didn't test it yet, but yesterday I wrote a script which allows us to test > > for Sphinx version breakages on multiple versions in one go. > > > > Using it (and again before this patch, but after my parser-yaml series), I > > noticed that 6.0.1 with "-jauto" with those packages: > > Why did you pick 6.0.1, which was in the middle of successive releases in > early 6.x days. I added all major,minor,latest-patch version since 3.4.3 and added to the script. I didn't check what of those are inside a distro or not. > No distro Sphinx packagers have picked this version. The hole idea is to have a script where we can automate build tests with old versions. Perhaps it makes a sense to add a flag at the table indicating what major distros have what sphinx version and a command line parameter to either test all or just the ones shipped on major distros. > > Just see the release history: > > [2022-10-16] 5.3.0 ### stable ### > [2022-12-29] 6.0.0 > [2023-01-05] 6.0.1 > [2023-01-05] 6.1.0 6.1.1 > [2023-01-07] 6.1.2 > [2023-01-10] 6.1.3 ### stable ### > [2023-04-23] 6.2.0 > > The crash you observed is hardly related to this fix. Almost certainly, the breakage with 6.0.1 is unrelated to this change. > I'd ignore this report as a random noise. > My Tested-by: still stands. > > Regards, > Akira >