[PATCH] doc: fix typos

  • Done
  • quality assurance status badge
Details
3 participants
  • Heinrich Schuchardt
  • Julien Lepiller
  • Maxim Cournoyer
Owner
unassigned
Submitted by
Maxim Cournoyer
Severity
normal
M
M
Maxim Cournoyer wrote on 17 Dec 2022 03:09
(address . guix-patches@gnu.org)
20221217020940.31610-1-maxim.cournoyer@savoirfairelinux.com
Fix a few typos spot during a first read of the contribution process.

Signed-off-by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@savoirfairelinux.com>
---

doc/develop/process.rst | 4 ++--
doc/develop/sending_patches.rst | 6 +++---
doc/develop/system_configuration.rst | 6 +++---
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Toggle diff (78 lines)
diff --git a/doc/develop/process.rst b/doc/develop/process.rst
index 0fa0143bf3..ba864bc40b 100644
--- a/doc/develop/process.rst
+++ b/doc/develop/process.rst
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ document.
<https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes>`_
and similar additional tags.
-* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according to
+* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptable according to
the `Reveiwer's statement of oversight
<https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#reviewer-s-statement-of-oversight>`_.
A *Reviewed-by:* tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an
@@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ like this:
workflows and environments however.
#. Although a custodian is supposed to perform their own tests it is a
- well-known and accepted fact that they needs help from other developers who
+ well-known and accepted fact that they need help from other developers who
- for example - have access to the required hardware or other relevant
environments. Custodians are expected to ask for assistance with testing
when required.
diff --git a/doc/develop/sending_patches.rst b/doc/develop/sending_patches.rst
index 173075687e..49374f14ff 100644
--- a/doc/develop/sending_patches.rst
+++ b/doc/develop/sending_patches.rst
@@ -20,8 +20,8 @@ LWN article `How to Get Your Change Into the Linux Kernel
Using patman
------------
-You can use a tool called patman to prepare, check and sent patches. It creates
-change logs, cover letters and patch notes. It also simplified the process of
+You can use a tool called patman to prepare, check and send patches. It creates
+change logs, cover letters and patch notes. It also simplifies the process of
sending multiple versions of a series.
See more details at :doc:`patman`.
@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ Notes
2. All code must follow the :doc:`codingstyle` requirements.
3. Before sending the patch, you *must* run some form of local testing.
- Submitting a patch that does not build or function correct is a mistake. For
+ Submitting a patch that does not build or function correctly is a mistake. For
non-trivial patches, either building a number of platforms locally or making
use of :doc:`ci_testing` is strongly encouraged in order to avoid problems
that can be found when attempting to merge the patch.
diff --git a/doc/develop/system_configuration.rst b/doc/develop/system_configuration.rst
index 52e4e1df15..40be46b082 100644
--- a/doc/develop/system_configuration.rst
+++ b/doc/develop/system_configuration.rst
@@ -86,12 +86,12 @@ When to use each mechanism
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
While there are some cases where it should be fairly obvious where to use each
-mechanism, as for example a command would done via Kconfig, a new I2C driver
+mechanism, as for example a command would be done via Kconfig, a new I2C driver
should use Kconfig and be configured via driver model and a header of values
generated by an external tool should be ``CFG``, there will be cases where it's
less clear and one needs to take care when implementing it. In general,
configuration *options* should be done in Kconfig and configuration *settings*
-should done in driver model or ``CFG``. Let us discuss things to keep in mind
+should be done in driver model or ``CFG``. Let us discuss things to keep in mind
when picking the appropriate mechanism.
A thing to keep in mind is that we have a strong preference for using Kconfig as
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ to use Kconfig in this case, it would result in using calculated rather than
constructed values, resulting in less clear code. Consider the example of a set
of register values for a memory controller. Defining this as a series of logical
ORs and shifts based on other defines is more clear than the Kconfig entry that
-set the calculated value alone.
+sets the calculated value alone.
When it has been determined that the practical solution is to utilize the
``CFG`` mechanism, the next decision is where to place these settings. It is

base-commit: 9bd3d354a1a0712ac27c717df9ad60566b0406ee
--
2.38.1
M
M
Maxim Cournoyer wrote on 17 Dec 2022 03:12
control message for bug #60135
(address . control@debbugs.gnu.org)
875yeabwwp.fsf@gmail.com
tags 60135 notabug
close 60135
quit
J
J
Julien Lepiller wrote on 17 Dec 2022 07:28
Re: [bug#60135] [PATCH] doc: fix typos
D92556D2-8F30-4E30-95C8-193561BD8D56@lepiller.eu
Le 17 décembre 2022 03:09:40 GMT+01:00, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> a écrit :
Toggle quote (22 lines)
>Fix a few typos spot during a first read of the contribution process.
>
>Signed-off-by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@savoirfairelinux.com>
>---
>
> doc/develop/process.rst | 4 ++--
> doc/develop/sending_patches.rst | 6 +++---
> doc/develop/system_configuration.rst | 6 +++---
> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/doc/develop/process.rst b/doc/develop/process.rst
>index 0fa0143bf3..ba864bc40b 100644
>--- a/doc/develop/process.rst
>+++ b/doc/develop/process.rst
>@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ document.
> <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes>`_
> and similar additional tags.
>
>-* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according to
>+* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptable according to
> the `Reveiwer's statement of oversight

Somehow you missed "Reveiwer" :)
H
H
Heinrich Schuchardt wrote on 17 Dec 2022 14:18
b1925871-7e8d-4872-4895-e32cbc1e912b@canonical.com
On 12/17/22 06:28, Julien Lepiller wrote:
Toggle quote (27 lines)
>
>
> Le 17 décembre 2022 03:09:40 GMT+01:00, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> Fix a few typos spot during a first read of the contribution process.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@savoirfairelinux.com>
>> ---
>>
>> doc/develop/process.rst | 4 ++--
>> doc/develop/sending_patches.rst | 6 +++---
>> doc/develop/system_configuration.rst | 6 +++---
>> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/doc/develop/process.rst b/doc/develop/process.rst
>> index 0fa0143bf3..ba864bc40b 100644
>> --- a/doc/develop/process.rst
>> +++ b/doc/develop/process.rst
>> @@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ document.
>> <https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#using-reported-by-tested-by-reviewed-by-suggested-by-and-fixes>`_
>> and similar additional tags.
>>
>> -* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptible according to
>> +* Reviewed-by: The patch has been reviewed and found acceptable according to
>> the `Reveiwer's statement of oversight
>
> Somehow you missed "Reveiwer" :)

I will consider this when merging.

Reviewed-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com>
?
Your comment

This issue is archived.

To comment on this conversation send an email to 60135@debbugs.gnu.org

To respond to this issue using the mumi CLI, first switch to it
mumi current 60135
Then, you may apply the latest patchset in this issue (with sign off)
mumi am -- -s
Or, compose a reply to this issue
mumi compose
Or, send patches to this issue
mumi send-email *.patch