On 24.05.2011 10:51, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 2011-05-24 10:14, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>> On 23.05.2011 16:39, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>>>> Optional arguments make parsing unnecessarily harder - even more so
>>>>> than two-args. Right now, rateest even crashes because of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> static const struct option rateest_opts[] = {
>>> [...]
>>>>> - {.name = "rateest-bps1", .has_arg = false, .val = OPT_RATEEST_BPS1},
>>>>> + {.name = "rateest-bps1", .has_arg = true, .val = OPT_RATEEST_BPS1},
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> This appears to be breaking backwards compatibility.
>>>
>>> Admittedly yes, though the fact that this has remained unseen for so
>>> long suggests that the potential user base is very small or not yet
>>> existing.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure this used to work at some point. Let me check history.
>>
>>> In my time with users in IRC, I notice that they in particular prefer
>>> hard stops in parsing over silent upgrades of rules[1], so as to
>>> actually become aware of the change upfront. As such, I believe the
>>> impact is well justified.
>>
>> Well, if it really was broken from the beginning I'm fine of course,
>> but I don't think that's case.
>
> It works half of the time, and fails half of the time because it can
> run - since the beginning - into UB when using argv[optind].
>
> Yes, the fix can be done in many ways, silent update is possible, but
> that is undesirable, as are optional arguments in the first place.
>
Well, not breaking compatibility for the people it used to work for
certainly is desirable. If its not too much trouble, I very much
prefer a soft update and if necessary replacement of the old options
after some warning period.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
