On 12/13/2012 6:19 AM, Miroslav Grepl wrote:
On 12/13/2012 04:03 AM, Dave Quigley wrote:
On 12/12/2012 7:40 PM, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:57 PM, David Quigley
<selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I've given a few talks on SELinux over the past year and I've spoken
to a
bunch of people on google+ about SELinux and one topic keeps coming
up. Many
people find semanage to be large and convoluted with the help text
being way
to large to sort through. The latter part of the complaint is easy to
address. The code for argument parsing in semanage (last time I
checked)
doesn't use things like argparse. If we switched it over to argparse we
could get per sub-command help messages that would be more useful to
people
when they messed up a sub-command. Would anyone be opposed if I
spent the
time to migrate semanage argument parsing and help messages over to
argparse
or a similar library?
I'm not sure that's even possible. For example, my all-time favourite
"quirk" of semanage is:
semanage fcontext -d --ftype -d /some/dir
The first -d is the flag, while the second -d is actually a value
passed to --ftype. I'm not sure if argparse will do the right job
parsing this -- my brain certainly doesn't. :)
Best,
--
Konstantin Ryabitsev
LinuxFoundation.org
Montréal, Québec
I'm actually going to try to pull together just the parsers without
any backend functionality to see how feasible this is and how it
looks. If we like how it looks and its possible we can move forward
with it. I think that since --ftype is a longarg that argparse might
be able to handle it. If not then some manipulation of things might be
in order (like making an = between --ftype and the -d).
Dave
--
selinux mailing list
selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
Hi,
basically I have it on my TODO list to re-write "semanage" to use
argparse. But I did some work on it and it is not so easy. But we can
work together to make this working.
Regards,
Miroslav
I started just the top level subcommand code last night which is the
trivial part. Tonight I'll try to implement individual subcommand
parsers for each of the commands. Hopefully once I start doing those
I'll be able to get an idea of where the problems are. There is a lot of
flexibility in what you can do with argparse but sometimes they decided
just not to extend certain functionality to subparsers. I think it will
probably require extensive use of groups and mutually_exclusive_groups
and all of the argument features to get it working but will make the
code cleaner and easy to extend. If you'd like I can work on the parsers
and giving you namespace objects and then you can take those and massage
the arguments into whats needed for you to pass into the seobject classes.
Dave
Dave
--
selinux mailing list
selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/selinux
