From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Mon Aug 26 05:25:04 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5556CD03C0; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 05:25:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from smtp-out-no.shaw.ca (smtp-out-no.shaw.ca [64.59.134.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Client", Issuer "CA" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46H0nW0xmBz3Q12; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 05:25:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from cy.schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from spqr.komquats.com ([70.67.125.17]) by shaw.ca with ESMTPA id 27UviVRdNUIS227UwinelM; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 23:25:01 -0600 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.3 cv=N41X6F1B c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=VFtTW3WuZNDh6VkGe7fA3g==:117 a=VFtTW3WuZNDh6VkGe7fA3g==:17 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=FmdZ9Uzk2mMA:10 a=iKhvJSA4AAAA:8 a=Wi8YH2NmAAAA:8 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=YxBL1-UpAAAA:8 a=RVYa22C5S4XIXbcRN4UA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=odh9cflL3HIXMm4fY7Wr:22 a=dHv3ApjLk2iqpRL9FmoU:22 a=IjZwj45LgO3ly-622nXo:22 a=Ia-lj3WSrqcvXOmTRaiG:22 Received: from slippy.cwsent.com (slippy [10.1.1.91]) by spqr.komquats.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E1A33C15; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 22:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slippy.cwsent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slippy.cwsent.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id x7Q5OtMH055918; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 22:24:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com) Received: from slippy (cy@localhost) by slippy.cwsent.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) with ESMTP id x7Q5Osnv055867; Sun, 25 Aug 2019 22:24:54 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com) Message-Id: <201908260524.x7Q5Osnv055867@slippy.cwsent.com> X-Authentication-Warning: slippy.cwsent.com: cy owned process doing -bs X-Mailer: exmh version 2.9.0 11/07/2018 with nmh-1.7.1 Reply-to: Cy Schubert From: Cy Schubert X-os: FreeBSD X-Sender: cy@cwsent.com X-URL: http://www.cschubert.com/ To: rgrimes@freebsd.org cc: alan somers , Hiroki Sato , Alan Somers , Jan Sucan , src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r351423 - in head: . sbin/ping6 sbin/ping6/tests In-reply-to: <201908260229.x7Q2TMSM074266@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <201908260229.x7Q2TMSM074266@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Comments: In-reply-to "Rodney W. Grimes" message dated "Sun, 25 Aug 2019 19:29:22 -0700." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 22:24:54 -0700 X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfCZRke9oKm27/6pSw+1/3cu5WwLhZ9CUjVuJr+G5d8hZLEKeUvOIXyunGzPokASOSpbLYgWARMqM846PYeFjyJdCJWkKg5tzGwtvHvEGCX0xpDZMVB4w hIin+BkGoodh8NyM+DK+v0S0c/UI7gSMv5pvixI7H9hStiOXFWZhzzrnrWLZ4ZTO/FGqxOZfNBy5dscPM55ciwBif67kydjvbyn7yMZqTztxpTg6pE9OYn0n MsSdNNvVMwKX9VcFDZZTnzbXPcq2u4SAz569lTjJxJHWK48luvxM+nEcrj9YW4qtXkebanM13KFpHrXNd9DjaLEjS5MMR7yNVdjJJiuyktFDAabvcogVlJXz fBJDCEhS X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46H0nW0xmBz3Q12 X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of cy.schubert@cschubert.com has no SPF policy when checking 64.59.134.9) smtp.mailfrom=cy.schubert@cschubert.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.97 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; IP_SCORE(-2.41)[ip: (-6.38), ipnet: 64.59.128.0/20(-3.15), asn: 6327(-2.45), country: CA(-0.09)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; HAS_XAW(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.96)[-0.959,0]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[8]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[9.134.59.64.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:6327, ipnet:64.59.128.0/20, country:CA]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[17.125.67.70.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.11] X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 05:25:04 -0000 In message <201908260229.x7Q2TMSM074266@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "Rodney W. Grimes" writes: > [ Charset UTF-8 unsupported, converting... ] > > On Sun, Aug 25, 2019, 2:11 PM Hiroki Sato wrote: > > > > > Alan Somers wrote > > > in > : > > > > > > as> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 1:22 PM Hiroki Sato wrote: > > > as> > > > > as> > Hi, > > > as> > > > > as> > Alan Somers wrote > > > as> > in <201908231522.x7NFMLuJ068037@repo.freebsd.org>: > > > as> > > > > as> > as> Author: asomers > > > as> > as> Date: Fri Aug 23 15:22:20 2019 > > > as> > as> New Revision: 351423 > > > as> > as> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/351423 > > > as> > as> > > > as> > as> Log: > > > as> > as> ping6: Rename options for better consistency with ping > > > as> > as> > > > as> > as> Now equivalent options have the same flags, and nonequivalent > > > options have > > > as> > as> different flags. This is a prelude to merging the two > > > commands. > > > as> > as> > > > as> > as> Submitted by: J?n Su?an > > > as> > as> MFC: Never > > > as> > as> Sponsored by: Google LLC (Google Summer of Code 2019) > > > as> > as> Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21345 > > > as> > > > > as> > I have an objection on renaming the existing option flags in > > > ping6(8) > > > as> > for compatibility with ping(8). > > > as> > > > > as> > Is it sufficient to add INET6 support to ping(8) with consistent > > > as> > flags and keep CLI of ping6(8) backward compatible? People have > > > used > > > as> > ping6(8) for >15 years, so it is too late to rename the flags. I > do > > > as> > not think the renaming is useful if "ping -6 localhost" or "ping > > > ::1" > > > as> > works. > > > as> > > > > as> > -- Hiroki > > > as> > > > as> If ping works with inet6, then why would we want to keep a separate > > > as> tool around? If it's just for the sake of people who don't want to o > r > > > as> can't update scripts, would a version in ports suffice? > > > > > > Because removing (or renaming) it causes a POLA violation. Do we > > > really have a strong, unavoidable reason to force people to rewrite > > > their script now? This is still a fairly essential and actively used > > > tool, not like rcp or rlogin. Although deprecating ping6(8) and > > > removing it from the base system in the future release at some point > > > may work, changing the existing interface will simply confuse people > > > who have used IPv6 for a long time. > > > > > > In my understanding, the purpose to integrate ping(8) and ping6(8) > > > into a single utility is to provide a consistent CLI and reduce > > > duplicate code, not to break compatibility. > > > > > > -- Hiroki > > > > > > > Those goals are incompatible. We can't provide a consistent CLI without > > breaking compatibility because ping and ping6 have conflicting options. > > And we can't keep ping6 around while also removing duplicate code because > > that would be, well, duplicate code. > > Only incompatible in mind. $0 can easily be used to determine which > set of getopt() to process in a single binary that then has unduplicated > code to implement the set of final options. A bit more to code but > should achive the single binary linked by 2 names processing 2 different > option sets executing 1 set of common code. > > I am firmyly in the camp these changes are being made to well estabilish > and probably heavily used utility by both humans and shell scripts. > > I was not happy with the changes to -n, but sat silient on that issue, > with other things being done I need to chime in and say I think that > this is poorly tought out with respect to downstream impact. > > > > > When would be a better time than a major version bump to make a change like > > this? > > > > The lack of a ping6 command in freebsd 13 should serve as a pretty obvious > > reminder that scripts will need updating. I think that putting a version > > of ping6 in ports should be a sufficient crutch for those who need it, > > don't you? > > How does a copy in ports of the old ping6 code "remove duplicate code", > that just changes the location of the duplication out of base where it > shall certainly rot as unmaintained causing numerious consumers heart > ache over time. Ports is a big issue, especially considering we're supporting previous versions of FreeBSD (stable/11 & stable/12) with an inconsistent ping6. Also agreed regarding checking *argv[0] to determine which getopt() to use. While we're at giving ping options some love and attention, shouldn't we also use getopt_long()? It is 2019 for that matter, and almost 2020 in a few months. > > -- > Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.or > g > -- Cheers, Cy Schubert FreeBSD UNIX: Web: http://www.FreeBSD.org The need of the many outweighs the greed of the few.