Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc: Fix callout reference in appimagetools #78379

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 23, 2020

Conversation

adisbladis
Copy link
Member

Motivation for this change
Things done
  • Tested using sandboxing (nix.useSandbox on NixOS, or option sandbox in nix.conf on non-NixOS linux)
  • Built on platform(s)
    • NixOS
    • macOS
    • other Linux distributions
  • Tested via one or more NixOS test(s) if existing and applicable for the change (look inside nixos/tests)
  • Tested compilation of all pkgs that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"
  • Tested execution of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • Determined the impact on package closure size (by running nix path-info -S before and after)
  • Ensured that relevant documentation is up to date
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ appimageTools.wrapType2 { # or wrapType1
<varname>src</varname> specifies the AppImage file to extract.
</para>
</callout>
<callout arearefs='ex-appimageTools-wrapping-2'>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It isn't a think I'm asking you to change, just something that crossed my mind. A great thing about these callouts is that they aren't inherently numbered. Concretely, these could be named ex-appimageTools-wrapping-name, ex-appimageTools-wrapping-src, ex-appimageTools-wrapping-extraPkgs and reduce the likelihood of mixing them up at reference time :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants