> it's actually the current man page that's full of ambiguous language and "weasel words".
The report suggests "clarifying" what the man page means by the (completely incorrect) statement that "Users should be very economical in the amount of seed material
that they read from /dev/urandom"
Probably the reporter was just being polite, but in the
absence of other comments in the bug or any kernel developers weighing in, it just sounds
like an editorial suggestion coming from a single Linux user. Remember that the man-pages project is separate from kernel development.
Yes, it reads to me like they were just being polite. The first couple sentences make it clear they think /dev/urandom is the right tool for "daily tasks" and that the man page is misleading people into thinking otherwise.
They begin with the most indisputable ways the man page is insufficient, as a way of starting the conversation -- which was never taken up.
Perhaps an actual patch would have been just accepted? Maybe the problem is the issue-submitter assumed there was someone on the other end who understood the kernel features and was interested in discussing making the man pages better.
The report suggests "clarifying" what the man page means by the (completely incorrect) statement that "Users should be very economical in the amount of seed material that they read from /dev/urandom"
Probably the reporter was just being polite, but in the absence of other comments in the bug or any kernel developers weighing in, it just sounds like an editorial suggestion coming from a single Linux user. Remember that the man-pages project is separate from kernel development.