On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 11:07 AM Cláudio Maia <cl...@isep.ipp.pt> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I have reviewed the file user/rsb/configuration.rst and I want to send a > patch with my proposed changes. However, before doing that I would like to > clarify some aspects before sending the patch, namely: > > - In the section 13.5.7 it is mentioned the following "The Device Tree > Compiler source code can be downloaded from http://www.jdl.com/software.";. > However this web site is offline and I'm not sure if it is supposed to be > online or it the went down between the time the documentation was produced > and now. Should we correct the link (if so, which should be the new one?) or > leave it as it is for example purposes and put a note on the document stating > that it is offline? > The RSB recipe for dtc now uses https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/utils/dtc/
I guess the example should be updated, consistent with what is available in the RSB tree. Can you open a ticket with milestone 6.1? patches welcome :) > - In section 13.5.1.1, the "xy" compression format is mentioned, however a > search on google revealed no such format. Is this a typo or does this format > really exist? > xz, patch sent. > - In section 13.5.2.1, the following text appears"See <<X1,``_configdir``>> > variable for details.". What is "<<X1,``_configdir``>>" supposed to mean? > Should it be a cross reference to some other place? > That's an xref leftover before conversion of this doc from asciidoc to sphinx/rst. I believe it intends to orient the reader to the definition of _configdir provided at https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/rsb/configuration.html#configuration I just sent a patch that updates the link. > - In section 13.5.7.4., it is mentioned a "|DESTDIR|" and a "DISTDIR". I > believe there is a typo on the second one, as it is not mentioned anywhere > else on the text in the page. Can someone please confirm if my judgement is > correct? > This is the dtc example, add to the ticket. And yes, it appears to be a typo. > - In section 13.5.8.2, a different notation is used using + signs, as for > instance "+%prep+" and "+%source+" which I also believe it is a typo and > these should be using this notation``%prep``. Again, can please someone > confirm this? > Another holdover from the conversion to sphinx/rst. Patch sent. > Regards, > Cláudio Thanks for your review, Gedare > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
