(2013/06/20 15:43), Atsushi Kumagai wrote:
> Hello Baoquan and HATAYAMA-san,
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:08:17 +0800
> Baoquan <bhe at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 06/20/2013 08:01 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> makedumpfile has some options which has two 2 forms, long option
>>>> and short option. E.g. --help | -h
>>>>
>>>> In man page and help, only one of them are presented, user may complain
>>>> of this. Here add missing options.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I guess the maintainer does so intentionally, I'm not sure of course.
>>> Characters for short options is limited resource, but now makedumpfile
>>> has considerably many options. We can no longer assign reasonable
>>> letters to each functionality with short options. For example, please
>>> look at the definition of longopts:
>
> That's right, some letters assigned to recent feature have no reason.
> So, they aren't suitable to be exported explicitly for users.
>
>>>
>>> static struct option longopts[] = {
>>> {"split", no_argument, NULL, 's'},
>>> {"reassemble", no_argument, NULL, 'r'},
>>> {"xen-syms", required_argument, NULL, 'y'},
>>> {"xen-vmcoreinfo", required_argument, NULL, 'z'},
>>> {"xen_phys_start", required_argument, NULL, 'P'},
>>> {"message-level", required_argument, NULL, 'm'},
>>> {"vtop", required_argument, NULL, 'V'},
>>> {"dump-dmesg", no_argument, NULL, 'M'},
>>> {"config", required_argument, NULL, 'C'},
>>> {"help", no_argument, NULL, 'h'},
>>> {"diskset", required_argument, NULL, 'k'},
>>> {"non-cyclic", no_argument, NULL, 'Y'},
>>> {"cyclic-buffer", required_argument, NULL, 'Z'},
>>> {"eppic", required_argument, NULL, 'S'},
>>> {"map-size", required_argument, NULL, 'A'},
>>> {0, 0, 0, 0}
>>> };
>>>
>>> I don't see any relationship on the last three options: non-cyclic vs Y,
>>> cyclic-buffer vs Z, eppic vs S and map-size vs A. I don't think there
>>> are users who use short options for these features.
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks for telling. I totally understand that unmarched letters between
>> long and short options are truly annoying. But like current code, only
>> presenting long options in man page and help may cause complaint from QA
>> or customers.
>>
>>>
>>> One of my solution is conversely to delete short options, and I don't
>>> think it problem because the short options are only implicitly exported
>>> without explicit description on such as manual page and help message.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, deleting short options is also a good method, let's wait and see
>> what the maintainer say.
>
> I agree to delete short options.
> Could you re-send the patch ?
>
BTW, we can assign non-printable characters as short options. Normally we don't type non-printable characters on console, so it's for free.
--
Thanks.
HATAYAMA, Daisuke
