From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Wed May 27 14:59:00 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@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 0C9563348CB for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:59:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49XDVq6dYGz4W7f for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id E202C3348CA; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: bugs@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 E1CA7334F0C for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49XDVq5lpTz4Vpy for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFAAF167AA for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 04REwxeN080630 for ; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 04REwxSc080629 for bugs@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 244389] [libxo] procstat(1) --libxo=xml produces invalid markup Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 14:58:59 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0-RELEASE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: phil@freebsd.org X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: cc Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 14:59:00 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D244389 Phil Shafer changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |phil@freebsd.org --- Comment #1 from Phil Shafer --- Yes, this is completely broken in a conceptual way. The tags in libxo shou= ld be thought of as "columns" in a database, not as data. Using a pid as the = tag here is wrong; it should be more like: ... 48700 zsh ... The big question is: how do we manage changes to libxo-based encoding? If = we make this change (or other future changes), then there is a risk of breaking something that depends on it? How do we announce changes that are not backwards compatible? Do we just declare is a "bug" that we fix and announ= ce via release notes? Do we need to start using xo_version() calls? Do we enforce the use of xo_version at the first change? How do we arrive on a policy that we are all comfortable with? In this case, it's a obvious bug in XML, but folks using JSON might be depending on it, so it's a semi-perfect example. Thanks, Phil --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=