From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F89D3CCA11; Mon, 9 Mar 2026 16:10:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773072621; cv=none; b=hoY8f7XVXeDJ7IlzJl4IZQGvelojeix2+AN0OCdgmMWXvL5cbMWUpbEteHDQKe3gDAPorvGw2EwJUfURxXxjjTZrQFtrN+ZCy1XhRNEPxab+6Ls49ze5Gc+6CBum/CGvcSLDxGr8bQMn6fZHpfgy7ielv3c6wV7BHNEuynhXbqE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773072621; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xpGURxzfmd5tmwdU6ZEqYaOgTt5F52/K5hLY4ATuySc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=S7rZo2sMAo+ulkhZcqhwGZCSsxpf9fAdSkFjV9tXHKat0sFpAdYU9gtNEggSEVl/6cKfjMYUJqYOp5RNu9dQYjRKaLsCVw8Ht4Q0gCvDHMpQas6cYErngsie9JSuGzXZTPEcgTwo7RkUf4E/lBk47/JzYWzXhxg1AzWqTiSlNmA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=nUsA+JeL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="nUsA+JeL" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 69AA840C9C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1773072619; bh=Hz1hJUwC6N3smegrQxjMoXkEvYOWDYjikvQz9Sfuh0U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=nUsA+JeLMxqfeWT6hMwpibDmKdaSf5B7TxuuBjc2j4wXjJO6Dsq7bYACv5Hz71chN +q5Ll/Ff68Jipx8vj53Sd+s0yTptvMzeBO5iSY7XbhO1LTLkxpI/DCXuJN/dKmPEPx nrDEsSuzn6snibRRVcRlvQBpD3Y15yq8yuxaNiLspj5Gs00uXDoT47zgC8kU+umD2F drIYxOIxkK/JBFn4UKCqo5qG5ifuT3NPuhf/xOauKJwtPtsJGLM7v16CNNMZpyl8Nd /EQsdgmDnRptjVgdZYdA0bwydgtdH2an45LnW3v1YTinFs00YvHw8ug+VT2HUXdVK3 5AA6Hckf1XSEg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:27b::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69AA840C9C; Mon, 9 Mar 2026 16:10:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: LIU Haoyang , Julia Lawall , Nicolas Palix , Shuah Khan Cc: LIU Haoyang , cocci@inria.fr, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs/dev-tools: fix a broken URL in dev-tools/coccinelle.rst In-Reply-To: <20260308100851.341-1-tttturtleruss@gmail.com> References: <20260308100851.341-1-tttturtleruss@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2026 10:10:18 -0600 Message-ID: <87v7f5vv9x.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain LIU Haoyang writes: > The original supplemental documentation for coccicheck is > https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck, which redirects to a not found page, > thus change it to https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck.html, > which adds a suffix to original URL to make it direct to the right page. > > Signed-off-by: LIU Haoyang > --- > Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst > index 2b942e3c8049..f73ccf5397f3 100644 > --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst > +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Supplemental documentation > > For supplemental documentation refer to the wiki: > > -https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck > +https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck.html > > The wiki documentation always refers to the linux-next version of the script. I'll apply this - a working URL is better than a broken one. But is there really nothing better to link to than a page that warns "OBSOLETE CONTENT" at the top? Thanks, jon