Re: [PATCH] proposed documentation changes

From: Greg KH (gregat_private)
Date: Thu Sep 27 2001 - 13:50:10 PDT

  • Next message: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] proposed documentation changes"

    On Thu, Sep 27, 2001 at 03:56:56PM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
    > I'd like to delay this conversion until we have a better solution than
    > simply throwing away the detail that is currently available in the
    > existing comments.  I looked briefly at the kernel thread you cited,
    > and noticed that someone asked why the kernel developers aren't just
    > using doxygen.  Is anyone familiar with this tool?  Regardless, it
    > seems that we can wait a little bit for this new support to handle
    > function prototypes in a manner closer to ordinary kernel functions.
    doxygen is a wonderful all singing, all dancing, document building tool
    from source code.  Unfortunately it turns your source code into an
    unreadable mess :)
    kernel-doc is here to stay for the kernel documentation process.  I
    suggest either we patch the script for better function pointer support,
    or just live with it's limitations.  As I have tried to work on the
    kernel-doc script in the past, my only option is to live within its
    limitations (my perl foo is not up to the challenge.)
    Placing the whole comments into the body of the structure definition as
    you had suggested to me sounds like a good idea.  I'll go try that
    and see what the results look like.
    greg k-h
    linux-security-module mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Sep 27 2001 - 13:56:40 PDT