Re: [PATCH 0/2] docs: Add support for relative paths in automarkup

[Randy Dunlap]

On 2/4/21 3:28 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>> As Jon previously noted [1], it would be nice if automarkup supported relative
>> paths as well when cross-referencing to other documents. This adds the support
>> for it, and documents it.
>>
>> Jon, after applying this, 43bc3ed73639 ("docs: dt: Use full path to enable
>> cross-reference") could be reverted without the link stopping to work.
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20201130142404.6ef6689e@xxxxxxx/
>>
>> Nícolas F. R. A. Prado (2):
>>   docs: Enable usage of relative paths to docs on automarkup
>>   docs: Document cross-referencing using relative path
>>
>>  Documentation/doc-guide/sphinx.rst | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>  Documentation/sphinx/automarkup.py |  7 +++++--
>>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> So I finally got around to playing with this set.  One thing I found is
> that some of the references that were being caught before were not
> now...  after far too much time, I figured out that the problem was
> references to .txt files, of which we have quite a few in the docs.
> admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt in particular is quite popular.
> Before this change, those were being turned into xrefs, afterward not.
> 
> To address that, I applied this little tweak:
> 
> -RE_doc = re.compile(r'(\bDocumentation/)?((\.\./)*[\w\-/]+)\.rst')
> +RE_doc = re.compile(r'(\bDocumentation/)?((\.\./)*[\w\-/]+)\.(rst|txt)')
> 
> That seems to make things work properly again.
> 
> While tracking this down I put in a print for failing cross references,
> and noted that we have quite a few; it's a useful way to see where the
> stale references are.  Maybe I'll try to hack together something to make
> those stand out so we can fix them.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jon

Hi,
I just sent a patch for file name changes in
Documentation/input/ff.rst
(https://lore.kernel.org/linux-input/20210203050842.24190-1-rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u).

I sent it to the INPUT maintainer because I thought that he would
want to review the changes.

I could resend it to the DOCS maintainer.  :)

-- 
~Randy