moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages

moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- 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up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by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 --]

Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages

[Karel Zak]

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 up some proc/ramfs options, i noticed util-linux was out of date by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

Re: moving filesystem mount options from util-linux to man-pages

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- 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 --]