coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Suggestion about how to improve sha512sum documentation


From: Pádraig Brady
Subject: Re: Suggestion about how to improve sha512sum documentation
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2023 13:16:58 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 15/06/2023 22:37, David Loyall wrote:
Hello.

Today the correct canonical link to the HTML form of the documentation
for sha512sum is this:
https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/md5sum-invocation.html

Note "md5sum" in the URL and in the document.

Here is the explanation:
https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/html_node/sha2-utilities.html

I think the situation should change somehow.  Off the top of my head:
what if you just flip it around so that the md5sum documentation
points at the sha2 utilities, instead of the other way around?

Here is why I considered this important enough to mention: at least
one major organization is currently giving bad advice about the sha2
family of utilities..  See
https://www.apache.org/info/verification.html#CheckingHashes and note
the absence of advice about using the `--check` argument.  The
`--check` argument is important.

Background: I started writing to a smaller organization suggesting
they add `--check` to their documentation and during the process I
discovered a) the larger organization also got it wrong and b) I can't
provide a direct link to clear documentation from the canonical
source.

A generation or two of folks have been taught to avoid anything that
says md5 on it...

Thank you for your time and of course for this collection of utilities
of immeasurable importance.

Well there are redirects setup for all utils to redirect to the appropriate
part of the manual. These are the URLs presented in the man pages BTW.
So in this case the best url to use is:

https://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/sha512sum


But I do agree that the docs for these checksum utils have become
a bit awkward as these utilities have evolved.
Currently the option descriptions are dispersed over the following nodes:

* b2sum
* cksum
* md5sum

It would be better I think to now organize the options over two nodes as 
follows,
and then adjust to redirects for the standalone checksum utils to 
cksum-common-options:

* cksum invocation
  * general options
    Options supported only by cksum
    --algorithm
    --base64
    --debug
    --length
    --raw
    --untagged
  * common options
    Options supported by cksum and standalone checksum utilities
    --binary
    --check
    --ignore-missing
    --quiet
    --status
    --tag
    --text
    --warn
    --strict
    --zero

cheers,
Pádraig



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]