Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Corbet [mailto:cor...@lwn.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 8:14 PM
> To: Chen, Hanxiao/陈 晗霄
> Cc: Andrew Morton; Nathan Scott; linux-...@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 <chenhanx...@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 <nath...@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 This file is dramatically out of date in general.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�Р骒r��y����b�X�肚�v�^�)藓{.n�+�伐�{��赙zXФ�≤�}��财�z�&j:+v�����赙zZ+��+zf＂�h���~����i���z� �wア�?�ㄨ��&�)撷f��^j谦y�m��@A�a囤�
0鹅h���i
