Re: [PATCH] doc/config: mark ssh allowedSigners example as literal

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 15.12.2021 11:23, Jeff King wrote:
The discussion for gpg.ssh.allowedSignersFile shows an example string
that contains "user1@xxxxxxxxxxx,user2@xxxxxxxxxxx". Asciidoc thinks
these are real email addresses and generates "mailto" footnotes for
them. This makes the rendered content more confusing, as it has extra
"[1]" markers:

 The file consists of one or more lines of principals followed by an
 ssh public key. e.g.: user1@xxxxxxxxxxx[1],user2@xxxxxxxxxxx[2]
 ssh-rsa AAAAX1... See ssh-keygen(1) "ALLOWED SIGNERS" for details.

and also generates pointless notes at the end of the page:

 NOTES
       1. user1@xxxxxxxxxxx
          mailto:user1@xxxxxxxxxxx

       2. user2@xxxxxxxxxxx
          mailto:user2@xxxxxxxxxxx

We can fix this by putting the example into a backtick literal block.
That inhibits the mailto generation, and as a bonus typesets the example
text in a way that sets it off from the regular prose (a tt font for
html, or bold in the roff manpage).

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
---
Possibly this could actually be done in a separate example block, but I
think this looks OK and fixes the most obvious problem.

Documentation/config/gpg.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/config/gpg.txt b/Documentation/config/gpg.txt
index 4f30c7dbdd..7875f4fccc 100644
--- a/Documentation/config/gpg.txt
+++ b/Documentation/config/gpg.txt
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ gpg.ssh.allowedSignersFile::
	A file containing ssh public keys which you are willing to trust.
	The file consists of one or more lines of principals followed by an ssh
	public key.
-	e.g.: user1@xxxxxxxxxxx,user2@xxxxxxxxxxx ssh-rsa AAAAX1...
+	e.g.: `user1@xxxxxxxxxxx,user2@xxxxxxxxxxx ssh-rsa AAAAX1...`
	See ssh-keygen(1) "ALLOWED SIGNERS" for details.
	The principal is only used to identify the key and is available when
	verifying a signature.
--

Thanks, this is obviously good. I don't think for this simple example an extra block is not needed unless we want to document the other options the allowedSigners file has in the git docs as well. I think it's better to reference the ssh-keygen manpage though.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux