On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 02:26:20PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:21:56PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote: > > On 11/02/2012 04:19 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > > I still don't understand. Why would an existing script call ovs-vsctl > > > with --may-exist as a global option? The call would not do anything > > > useful, because it would exit with a fatal error every time. Taking > > > this argument to its logical conclusion, one must never extend any > > > program by adding a new option, because it could break some existing > > > script that tries to use that (nonexistent) option. > > > > Exactly. Your patch breaks existing scripts, by suddenly allowing for > > --may-exist to work where it used to not. > > You still haven't explained why an existing script would call > ovs-vsctl with --may-exist as a global option. Why would it do that? > > > I'm saying you should just change the error message, but do not allow > > for it to be used as a global option. > > It's an option, and it's easier to do than the alternative patch that > I sent out, but I don't understand why you think it will break any > real script. Who is in the habit of writing useless scripts that do > nothing but provoke errors?
Do you have any further comment? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
