The 04/03/2021 20:22, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 08:15:17PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 12:07:40PM +0800, Firo Yang wrote: > > > Our customer reported a following issue: > > > If '--concurrent' was passed to ebtables command behind other arguments, > > > '--concurrent' will not take effect sometimes; for a simple example, > > > ebtables -L --concurrent. This is becuase the handling of '--concurrent' > > > is implemented in a passing-order-dependent way. > > > > > > So we can fix this problem by processing it before other arguments. > > > > Would you instead make a patch to spew an error if --concurrent is the > > first argument? > > Wrong wording: > > Would you instead make a patch to spew an error if --concurrent is > _not_ the first argument? Hi Pablo, I think it would make more sense if we don't introduce this inconvenice to users. If you insist, I would go create the patch as you intended. -- Firo > > > --concurrent has never worked unless you place it in first place > > anyway. >
