Hello! On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:50:52AM +0930, Ron wrote: [...] > Yeah, I completely sympathise with the pain in that line of thinking. > I guess the question for me would be is there really any use case > where someone might actually be relying on this (mis)behaviour? > One where they aren't already explicitly passing -s DEVNAME as one > of the tags they want exported (which really is what you should be > doing if that's what you want). [...]
I'm willing to bet that noone explicitly uses "-s DEVNAME" already, as that simply does not work (because DEVNAME is not a tag). Hacking the code to make DEVNAME a tag looked trivial to me but changing things (again) will be risk ending up in a neverending back-and-forth dance between people wanting/relying on different behaviours. Thats why I wanted to ask for input from upstream as soon as possible in this matter, even before producing the patch. Regards, Andreas Henriksson -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
