Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221004184625.10076-1-olof@lixom.net>
In-Reply-To: <20221004184625.10076-1-olof@lixom.net>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Oct 2022 18:21:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72mFGoDySLHNyakOnJMDpRVmvCRUAAuiKw1B2KrMhFteCA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts: rust_is_available.sh: Provide hints on how to
 fix missing pieces
To:     Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Roy_Baron?= <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
        rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 8:47 PM Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
>
> This might be a bit bikesheddy, but it saves a few roundtrips to the
> documentation when getting the `make LLVM=1 rustavailable` run to pass.

It is faster for someone that already knows how things work, but it
may make newcomers skip the docs and it duplicates the information
there. In addition, for the non-error case, it makes it more verbose
which may not be appreciated. So maybe we should point to the docs
instead? What do you think?

Also, the patch doesn't add instructions for all the cases, so
somebody that may have hit one of the documented ones + not have read
the docs may wonder where to find them the solution or why they are
missing.

Thanks!

Cheers,
Miguel