From: "Chen, Hanxiao" <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Nathan Scott <nathans@redhat.com>,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <trivial@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Docs: proc: fix kernel version
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] Docs: proc: fix kernel version
Thread-Index: AQHQfCyLthzGuxpB2kqixHixPQor451YO1hA
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 02:58:50 +0000
Message-ID: <5871495633F38949900D2BF2DC04883E738A089F@G08CNEXMBPEKD02.g08.fujitsu.local>
References: <1429584503-2530-1-git-send-email-chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com>
 <20150421061354.582a430d@lwn.net>
In-Reply-To: <20150421061354.582a430d@lwn.net>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 1923
Lines: 53

Hi,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Corbet [mailto:corbet@lwn.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 8:14 PM
> To: Chen, Hanxiao/?? ????
> Cc: Andrew Morton; Nathan Scott; linux-doc@vger.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Jiri Kosina
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Docs: proc: fix kernel version
> 
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 22:48:23 -0400
> Chen Hanxiao <chenhanxiao@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> 
> Thank you for working to update the documentation!  That said, though, I
> have a question and a request with regard to this particular change.
> 
> > -Table 1-2: Contents of the status files (as of 3.20.0)
> > +Table 1-2: Contents of the status files (as of 4.1)
> 
> That file is full of weird version numbers; is there a reason why you want
> to change that one in particular?  The 2.6.8-rc3 reference immediately
> afterward doesn't seem more worthy of protection.
> 

commit 15eb42d674de8da66950f78b5c7202accabe026e
had updated Table 1-2 in this doc.

When we posted it, we thought it's for in 3.20.
Now it comes to mainline from mm tree, it's 4.1 now.
So I think we need a surplus patch for it.

Also, patch Reviewed-by: Nathan Scott <nathans@redhat.com>

> This file is dramatically out of date in general.  Rather than change the
> version number at the head of the list of status files, why not update the
> list to match current reality?  There are a lot of things missing.
> 
> Failing that, I would entertain a patch that simply removes most of the
> version numbers from this file; I don't think they provide any useful
> information, and I certainly don't see the value of occasionally tweaking
> them forward.

Before someone could be able to update the whole file,
keeping version numbers still help.

Regards,
- Chen

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jon
????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m????????????I?