Please backport commit 00d95fcc4dee ("docs: kdoc: handle the obsolescensce of docutils.ErrorString()") to v6.17.y
Hi
When people update docutils to 0.22, then the Documentation build will start failing as documented with the commit 00d95fcc4dee ("docs: kdoc: handle the obsolescensce of docutils.ErrorString()").
So it would be nice if people can still build the documenation with newer versions (was for instance relevant for Debian unstable for building the 6.17.y based packages): https://bugs.debian.org/1118100
Thus can you please backport 00d95fcc4dee ("docs: kdoc: handle the obsolescensce of docutils.ErrorString()") down to 6.17.y stable series? The commit does not apply cleanly so adding a backport for it.
Actually it would be nice to go further back, but I just tested as well 6.12.y and there due to missing faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") there are more work.
faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") should be applicable but I'm not sure if you want to support that. Jonathan what would you think?
Regards, Salvatore
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils + return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}' + __version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 08:36:00AM +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils
- return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}'
__version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Yes this is why I asked Jonathan, how to handle backports to older series, if it is wanted to pick specifically as well faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") or a partial backport of it, or do a 6.12.y backport of 00d95fcc4dee with additional changes (like you pointed out).
I'm just not sure what is preferred here.
Regards, Salvatore
Salvatore Bonaccorso carnil@debian.org writes:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 08:36:00AM +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils
- return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}'
__version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Yes this is why I asked Jonathan, how to handle backports to older series, if it is wanted to pick specifically as well faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") or a partial backport of it, or do a 6.12.y backport of 00d95fcc4dee with additional changes (like you pointed out).
I'm just not sure what is preferred here.
I'm not sure it matters that much...the additional change suggested by Andreas seems fine. It's just a backport, and it shouldn't break anything, so doesn't seem worth a lot of worry.
Thanks,
jon
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 10:06:33AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
Salvatore Bonaccorso carnil@debian.org writes:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 08:36:00AM +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils
- return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}'
__version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Yes this is why I asked Jonathan, how to handle backports to older series, if it is wanted to pick specifically as well faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") or a partial backport of it, or do a 6.12.y backport of 00d95fcc4dee with additional changes (like you pointed out).
I'm just not sure what is preferred here.
I'm not sure it matters that much...the additional change suggested by Andreas seems fine. It's just a backport, and it shouldn't break anything, so doesn't seem worth a lot of worry.
Okay here is a respective backported change for the 6.12.y series as well.
Does that look good for you?
Regards, Salvatore
Salvatore Bonaccorso carnil@debian.org writes:
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 10:06:33AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
Salvatore Bonaccorso carnil@debian.org writes:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 08:36:00AM +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils
- return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}'
__version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Yes this is why I asked Jonathan, how to handle backports to older series, if it is wanted to pick specifically as well faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") or a partial backport of it, or do a 6.12.y backport of 00d95fcc4dee with additional changes (like you pointed out).
I'm just not sure what is preferred here.
I'm not sure it matters that much...the additional change suggested by Andreas seems fine. It's just a backport, and it shouldn't break anything, so doesn't seem worth a lot of worry.
Okay here is a respective backported change for the 6.12.y series as well.
Does that look good for you?
I haven't actually tried it, but it looks OK to me.
jon
On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 09:10:45PM +0100, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 10:06:33AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
Salvatore Bonaccorso carnil@debian.org writes:
Hi,
On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 08:36:00AM +0100, Andreas Radke wrote:
For kernel 6.12 there's just one more place required to add the fix:
--- a/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py 2025-10-23 16:20:48.000000000 +0200 +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kernel_abi.py.new 2025-10-26 08:08:33.168985951 +0100 @@ -42,9 +42,11 @@ from docutils import nodes, statemachine from docutils.statemachine import ViewList from docutils.parsers.rst import directives, Directive -from docutils.utils.error_reporting import ErrorString from sphinx.util.docutils import switch_source_input
+def ErrorString(exc): # Shamelessly stolen from docutils
- return f'{exc.__class__.__name}: {exc}'
__version__ = '1.0'
def setup(app):
Yes this is why I asked Jonathan, how to handle backports to older series, if it is wanted to pick specifically as well faccc0ec64e1 ("docs: sphinx/kernel_abi: adjust coding style") or a partial backport of it, or do a 6.12.y backport of 00d95fcc4dee with additional changes (like you pointed out).
I'm just not sure what is preferred here.
I'm not sure it matters that much...the additional change suggested by Andreas seems fine. It's just a backport, and it shouldn't break anything, so doesn't seem worth a lot of worry.
Okay here is a respective backported change for the 6.12.y series as well.
Does that look good for you?
Now queued up, thanks!
greg k-h
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Andreas Radke -
Greg Kroah-Hartman -
Jonathan Corbet -
Salvatore Bonaccorso