On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:02:34PM +0530, Shyam Saini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 10:29 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 05:35:55PM +0530, Shyam Saini wrote:
> >> Before the [Test] commit if we run nft with incomplete "add set"
> >> command it caused segmentation fault and exit with error code 139 and
> >> further it didn't throw any error message.
> >>
> >> For example:
> >> $ sudo nft add set t s
> >>
> >> But after the [Test] commit it throws syntax error message and exits with
> >> return value 1.
> >>
> >> For example:
> >> $ sudo nft add set t s
> >> <cmdline>:1:12-12: Error: syntax error, unexpected newline, expecting '{'
> >> add set t s
> >> ^
> >>
> >> This commit tests changes made in the [Test] commit.
> >
> > Applied, thanks.
> >
> > I have reworked a bit your commit message, it looks a bit convoluted.
>
> Thanks a lot :)
>
> > No worries, have a look at what I pushed out for reference.
>
> Shouldn't we follow conventions mentioned in "scripts/checkpatch.pl" ?
Interesting.
So the [test] thing is something that checkpatch.pl suggests, right?
I would like to know more about that new thing, do you have
documentation about this?
I just tend to like that commit message are human-readable. I
understand this structure makes it easier for robots, more simple to
parse.
So don't take checkpatch too seriously, probably too much engineering
is going on there ;-)
--
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
