Hi Dave, On 5/13/20 1:15 PM, Dave Martin wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 01:03:27PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >> Hi Dave, >> >> On 5/13/20 12:56 PM, Dave Martin wrote: >>> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:09:27PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: >>>> Hi Dave, >>>> >>>> On 5/12/20 6:36 PM, Dave Martin wrote: >>>>> The prctl.2 source is unnecessarily hard to navigate, not least >>>>> because prctl option flags are traditionally named PR_* and so look >>>>> just like prctl names. >>>>> >>>>> For each actual prctl, add a comment of the form >>>>> >>>>> .\" prctl PR_FOO >>>>> >>>>> to make it move obvious where each top-level prctl starts. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, we could add some clever macros, but let's not confuse >>>>> dumb parsers. >>>> >>>> A patch like this, which makes sweeping changes across the page, >>>> should be best placed at the end of a series, I think. >>>> The reason is that if I fail to apply this patch (and I am a >>>> little dubious about it), then probably the rest of the patches >>>> in the series won't apply. (Furthermore, it also forced me to >>>> apply patch 02 already, which I wanted to reflect on a little.) >>> >>> Agreed, I'll try to do that in future. >>> >>>> That said, I'll apply it, so that the remaining patches >>>> apply cleanly. I'll consider later whether to keep this >>>> change. For example, I wonder if a visually distinctive >>>> source line that is always the same would be better than >>>> these comments that repeat the PR_* names. For example, >>>> something like >>>> >>>> .\" ========================== >>>> >>>> I'll circle back to this later. >>> >>> I'd prefer to keep the name if we can, since navigating by search is >>> otherwise bothersome due to false hits. >>> >>> Could we do both, say: >>> >>> .\" === PR_FOO === >> >> Okay -- I'll give that some thought. >> >>> If you prefer to reject this patch, I'm happy to rebase and repost the >>> series as appropriate. >>> >>> In any case, this one is nice to have rather than essential. >> >> For now, the patch is already committed and pushed. > > OK, thanks. I'm happy to write a further patch when you've decided what > to do, if it saves you work. Let's leave this for the moment. Once the dust settles on your remaining patches, I'll try to remember to circle back on this. Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
