ci: check the links of the book and of the API docs

[anlavandier]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Summary 0.2.1

Book

Status	Count
🔍 Total	1110
✅ Successful	1057
⏳ Timeouts	1
🔀 Redirected	30
👻 Excluded	4
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	15
⛔ Unsupported	3

Api docs

Status	Count
🔍 Total	118145
✅ Successful	112283
⏳ Timeouts	3
🔀 Redirected	83
👻 Excluded	0
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	5747
⛔ Unsupported	29

[github-actions]

Summary 0.2.0

Book

Status	Count
🔍 Total	1110
✅ Successful	1058
⏳ Timeouts	1
🔀 Redirected	29
👻 Excluded	4
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	15
⛔ Unsupported	3

Api docs

Status	Count
🔍 Total	118145
✅ Successful	112295
⏳ Timeouts	3
🔀 Redirected	72
👻 Excluded	0
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	5746
⛔ Unsupported	29

[github-actions]

Summary 0.1.0

Book

Status	Count
🔍 Total	1071
✅ Successful	1018
⏳ Timeouts	1
🔀 Redirected	30
👻 Excluded	4
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	15
⛔ Unsupported	3

Api docs

Status	Count
🔍 Total	117509
✅ Successful	111585
⏳ Timeouts	3
🔀 Redirected	84
👻 Excluded	0
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	5813
⛔ Unsupported	24

[github-actions]

Summary 0.3.0

Book

Status	Count
🔍 Total	5272
✅ Successful	5142
⏳ Timeouts	1
🔀 Redirected	105
👻 Excluded	4
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	17
⛔ Unsupported	3

Api docs

Status	Count
🔍 Total	151724
✅ Successful	144213
⏳ Timeouts	3
🔀 Redirected	150
👻 Excluded	0
❓ Unknown	0
🚫 Errors	7318
⛔ Unsupported	40

[anlavandier]

@ROMemories, I was looking at the link to ariel-os/dev and I realized that there were a lot of mistakes made with older (sometimes) current documentation. They mostly stayed hidden because of the fact that A) the api docs' links aren't checked and B) the links in the book are checked in offline mode. So i decided that I wanted to fix this for our older docs hence this PR. Wdyt ?

[anlavandier]

Looking at the API docs of 0.1.0, clearly --include-verbatim and --include-fragments need to be removed because they return false positives.
Then the errors are mostly because of:

• the fact that two targets are used for the building of the docs (host and riscv32-imac-unknown-elf).
• --no-deps being used.
• missing all.html on every crates that is a direct dependency of Ariel OS
• http: links in copyright files and/or font files
• timeout on http://www.adobe.com because the http version does not exist.
• Very weird issues with rand_core and ariel-os-storage
• Some genuine errors like a 404 on https://ariel-os.github.io/ariel-os/dev/docs/book/tooling/defmt.html which also doesn't exist on 0.1.0

[ROMemories]

It's not exactly clear to me yet what this is attempting to do: it would only comment on PRs on this repo with the overall status of links, and not block the PR (unlike what we do in ariel-os/ariel-os, right? I usually find that kind of monitoring very useful, but wouldn't it be too late anyway when we PR the docs to this repo?

[anlavandier]

The primary reason was for me to have a way to:

• know if changes I made to the docs were improving them
• motivate those changes to reviewers
  The scope was then extended a bit for me to play around with GHA CI.

It's not blocking because some link are never going to work because it's upstream's fault. For example there are link to licenses down the page in the embedded_hal part of our doc which lead to a 404. The same links are present on the docs.rs page as well and also 404.

As for why it's in this repo and not the main, first for testing here to figure out if we want to go further with this and also to help when "backporting" some fixes to our older docs

[ROMemories]

I'm a bit wary of adding CI to this repo, at least because we don't have a bot set up that would update the pinned Actions. I think it's fine if we keep it just an open PR for a bit? This should likely partially migrate to the main repo anyway.

[ROMemories]

Suggested change

	tags: ["0.1.0", "0.2.0", "0.2.1", "0.3.0"]
	tags: ["0.1.0", "0.2.0", "0.2.1", "0.3.0", "0.4.0"]

[anlavandier]

Yes, I think that it's better to just rework the CI part of this PR for the current docs through ariel-os/ariel-os/pull/1894. The changes of the linked PR can be retroactively applied to the existing docs