Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
ecryptfs.txt moved into Documentation/filesystems, so move the 00-INDEX entry.
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-new/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:43:15.000000000 -0500
@@ -134,8 +134,6 @@
- info on Linux Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) subsystem.
early-userspace/
- info about initramfs, klibc, and userspace early during boot.
-ecryptfs.txt
- - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
eisa.txt
- info on EISA bus support.
exception.txt
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-new/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:42:08.000000000 -0500
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
- info about the locking scheme used for directory operations.
dlmfs.txt
- info on the userspace interface to the OCFS2 DLM.
+ecryptfs.txt
+ - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
ext2.txt
- info, mount options and specifications for the Ext2 filesystem.
ext3.txt
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:46:17 -0500 Rob Landley wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
>
> ecryptfs.txt moved into Documentation/filesystems, so move the 00-INDEX entry.
Please use the expected (canonical) patch format.
See Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
14) The canonical patch format
Additional help:
http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/tpp.txt
http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html
Thanks.
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
On Thursday 30 August 2007 2:04:37 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Please use the expected (canonical) patch format.
>
> See Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> 14) The canonical patch format
from Rob Landley <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
ecryptfs.txt moved into filesystems, make 00-INDEX follow.
---
00-INDEX | 2 --
filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 ++
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-new/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:43:15.000000000 -0500
@@ -134,8 +134,6 @@
- info on Linux Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) subsystem.
early-userspace/
- info about initramfs, klibc, and userspace early during boot.
-ecryptfs.txt
- - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
eisa.txt
- info on EISA bus support.
exception.txt
--- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
+++ linux-new/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:42:08.000000000 -0500
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
- info about the locking scheme used for directory operations.
dlmfs.txt
- info on the userspace interface to the OCFS2 DLM.
+ecryptfs.txt
+ - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
ext2.txt
- info, mount options and specifications for the Ext2 filesystem.
ext3.txt
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
Hi Rob,
On Thu, 30 Aug 2007, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Thursday 30 August 2007 2:04:37 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > Please use the expected (canonical) patch format.
> >
> > See Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> > 14) The canonical patch format
>
> from Rob Landley <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
>
> ecryptfs.txt moved into filesystems, make 00-INDEX follow.
That's still not quite right :-) What Randy meant is that the sign-off
must come /after/ the patch description:
From: Random J Hacker <[email protected]>
/*
* Above line not really required if it's your own patch that you're
* sending. But required when you're "relaying" someone else's patch,
* or if there are multiple people in the sign-off chain below,
* to differentiate as to who was the author of the patch.
*/
[PATCH] <subsystem>: <one-line summary>
/*
* Above line not really required if Subject: of email already such.
* But may be required if you're replying on some other LKML thread,
* whose subject may have nothing to do with this patch.
*/
<a few line(s) of patch description,
maybe a couple of paragraphs even.>
Signed-off-by: Random J Hacker <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Bob Z Maintainer <[email protected]>
/*
* It is generally preferable to order the sign-off's above so that
* they reflect the patch journey -- so the original author preferably
* comes first, then those who relayed it or picked it up from the
* author (often the maintainer), and so on, till the person who is
* finally relaying it currently (so from the above it seems this is
* being sent out by Bob). If this is the first time a patch is being
* sent, there would naturally be just a single sign-off line.
*/
Then three hyphens, followed by diffstat and patch ... so the below
looks good :-)
[ All this is not too important, admittedly, but causes least amount of
processing time to be wasted on the recipient's end, and also does not
confuse scripts that may be used to extract patches (and git commit
command-line arguments) from mails automatically. ]
> ---
>
> 00-INDEX | 2 --
> filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-new/Documentation/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:43:15.000000000 -0500
> @@ -134,8 +134,6 @@
> - info on Linux Digital Video Broadcast (DVB) subsystem.
> early-userspace/
> - info about initramfs, klibc, and userspace early during boot.
> -ecryptfs.txt
> - - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
> eisa.txt
> - info on EISA bus support.
> exception.txt
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc4/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-27 20:32:35.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-new/Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX 2007-08-30 14:42:08.000000000 -0500
> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
> - info about the locking scheme used for directory operations.
> dlmfs.txt
> - info on the userspace interface to the OCFS2 DLM.
> +ecryptfs.txt
> + - docs on eCryptfs: stacked cryptographic filesystem for Linux.
> ext2.txt
> - info, mount options and specifications for the Ext2 filesystem.
> ext3.txt
On Friday 31 August 2007 7:10:00 am Satyam Sharma wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2007, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 August 2007 2:04:37 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > Please use the expected (canonical) patch format.
> > >
> > > See Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> > > 14) The canonical patch format
> >
> > from Rob Landley <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
> >
> > ecryptfs.txt moved into filesystems, make 00-INDEX follow.
>
> That's still not quite right :-) What Randy meant is that the sign-off
> must come /after/ the patch description:
Randy emailed me about it offline and I updated my wrapper script.
I've always had a bit of a blind spot when it comes to filling out forms (I
suck at bureaucracy), so I made a script to do it, currently:
#!/bin/bash
echo "From: Rob Landley <[email protected]>"
echo
echo "Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>"
echo "---"
echo
cat $1 | diffstat
echo
cat $1
I note that the example uses "From:" but the summary refers to it as
the "from" line with no capital letter or colon, and unix being case
sensitive I reproduced the quoted string verbatim. (See "I suck at
bureaucracy", above.)
> [ All this is not too important, admittedly, but causes least amount of
> processing time to be wasted on the recipient's end, and also does not
> confuse scripts that may be used to extract patches (and git commit
> command-line arguments) from mails automatically. ]
If it's going to be parsed by a script, it might as well be generated by a
script...
I've got another dozen of these patches to send, but I'm waiting to see which
ones Jesper Juhl has queued up first. :)
(Between the two of us, we'll get this updated eventually...)
Rob
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 13:56:10 -0500 Rob Landley wrote:
> On Friday 31 August 2007 7:10:00 am Satyam Sharma wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > On Thu, 30 Aug 2007, Rob Landley wrote:
> > > On Thursday 30 August 2007 2:04:37 pm Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > > > Please use the expected (canonical) patch format.
> > > >
> > > > See Documentation/SubmittingPatches:
> > > > 14) The canonical patch format
> > >
> > > from Rob Landley <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > ecryptfs.txt moved into filesystems, make 00-INDEX follow.
> >
> > That's still not quite right :-) What Randy meant is that the sign-off
> > must come /after/ the patch description:
>
> Randy emailed me about it offline and I updated my wrapper script.
>
> I've always had a bit of a blind spot when it comes to filling out forms (I
> suck at bureaucracy), so I made a script to do it, currently:
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> echo "From: Rob Landley <[email protected]>"
> echo
or: echo put_changelog_here
> echo "Signed-off-by: Rob Landley <[email protected]>"
> echo "---"
> echo
> cat $1 | diffstat
cat $1 | diffstat -p1 -w70
> echo
> cat $1
>
> I note that the example uses "From:" but the summary refers to it as
> the "from" line with no capital letter or colon, and unix being case
> sensitive I reproduced the quoted string verbatim. (See "I suck at
> bureaucracy", above.)
>
> > [ All this is not too important, admittedly, but causes least amount of
> > processing time to be wasted on the recipient's end, and also does not
> > confuse scripts that may be used to extract patches (and git commit
> > command-line arguments) from mails automatically. ]
>
> If it's going to be parsed by a script, it might as well be generated by a
> script...
yep.
---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***