[PATCH iproute2] man: ip-rule.8: minor changes

[PATCH iproute2] man: ip-rule.8: minor changes

[Evelyn Mitchell]

These are grammatical and typographical fixes, with one wording change.

Evelyn Mitchell
tummy.com

---
--- ip-rule.8.orig      2020-07-07 11:17:00.609932807 -0600
+++ ip-rule.8   2020-07-07 11:25:48.247022637 -0600
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@
 .SH DESCRIPTION
 .I ip rule
 manipulates rules
-in the routing policy database control the route selection algorithm.
+in the routing policy database to control the route selection algorithm.

 .P
 Classic routing algorithms used in the Internet make routing decisions
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@

 .P
 Each RPDB entry has additional
-attributes. F.e. each rule has a pointer to some routing
+attributes. For example, each rule has a pointer to some routing
 table. NAT and masquerading rules have an attribute to select new IP
 address to translate/masquerade. Besides that, rules have some
 optional attributes, which routes have, namely
@@ -252,11 +252,11 @@

 .TP
 .BI sport " NUMBER | NUMBER-NUMBER"
-select the source port value to match. supports port range.
+select the source port value to match. Supports port range.

 .TP
 .BI dport " NUMBER | NUMBER-NUMBER"
-select the destination port value to match. supports port range.
+select the destination port value to match. Supports port range.

 .TP
 .BI priority " PREFERENCE"
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@

 .TP
 .BI protocol " PROTO"
-the routing protocol who installed the rule in question.  As an
example when zebra installs a rule it would get RTPROT_ZEBRA as the
installing protocol.
+the routing protocol which installed the rule in question.  As an
example when zebra installs a rule it would get RTPROT_ZEBRA as the
installing protocol.

 .TP
 .BI suppress_prefixlength " NUMBER"

Re: [PATCH iproute2] man: ip-rule.8: minor changes

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 11:40:37 -0600
Evelyn Mitchell <efmphone@gmail.com> wrote:

> These are grammatical and typographical fixes, with one wording change.
> 
> Evelyn Mitchell
> tummy.com

The wording change looks fine, but the patch has a couple of issues.
First, you did not include a Signed-off-by: as required.
See Linux kernel documentation on submitting patches.

Second, the patch was not formatted in a way that it could
be automatically consumed by git (or patch) commands.

Lastly, it looks like your mail client maybe modifiying the
patch when sending. Hard to tell because of the patch formatting issues.

Please fix the above and resubmit.