Re: [patch] kernel API documentation system

Jes Sorensen (Jes.Sorensen@cern.ch)
26 Sep 1999 23:22:30 +0200


>>>>> "Ed" == Ed Grimm <tgape@bigfoot.com> writes:

Ed> On 26 Sep 1999, Jes Sorensen wrote:
>> Putting auto generated documents in the same directory as the
>> static ones is a bad idea imho. It makes it hard for people to keep
>> track of what can be deleted and what cannot.

Ed> Wouldn't the fact that 'make clean' removes it be good enough?
Ed> How about adding a Documentation/Makefile, which also has a make
Ed> clean to get rid of them?

This could work, but it is less clear and if you run around trying to
extract documentation from every C file in the kernel, which I asume
is the idea, then the Makefile doesn't know what documentation to
delete and what not to.

I am not against putting auto extractable documentation in the code,
but I think it would be safer to put the output in a seperate
directory and not mix it with static files.

Jes

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/