On (08/14/07 18:20), Peter Memishian wrote:
> 
>       * For consistency with other dladm subcommands using the "new"
>         format, the field names should be in uppercase.

Ok, I also noticed that, a bit later, in 6515065

>       * The units feel out-of-place in the `speed' field name, and
>         create an asymmetry with "-o" (unless the user is really
>         supposed to type "-o speed(Mb/s)" ;-).  Also, I'd think we'd
>         benefit from grouping the unit with the value itself -- e.g.:
> 
>                 $ dladm show-ether -x -o link,param,speed bge0
>                 LINK            PARAM       SPEED
>                 bge0            current     1G
>                                 capable     1G,100M,10M
>                                 adv         1G,100M,10M
>                                 peeradv     1G,100M,10M

good suggestion- that also matches the syntax taken by
other popular tools like ttcp. I'll fix this part..

>       * Not sure what the column name "param" means (though I can see
>         what it does from context).

yeah, I couldn't think of a better column name for that.. any
suggestions? 

>       * I'd expect "autoneg" to be no/yes rather than 0/1.  Not sure
>         what the numeric values for pause and rem_fault mean, but I'd
>         prefer words there too, if possible.

Ok,

>       * I'm somewhat uncomfortable with having "-x" vary the set of
>         fields shown (rem_fault above).  It seems more predictable
>         to have that controlled by "-o" (e.g., "-x -o all" to get what's
>         shown above -- and again, I'm OK with "-v" being a synonym for
>         "-o all".)

There are two schools of thought on this... I think some folks
like Garrett were thrown off by the 2 dimensions (-x vs -o)
in the "long" output. 

I myself have no personal preferences, and it does seem simpler
to print everything with 1 flag (-x) instead  of 2, since 
we are choosing to print exactly 1 additional field.

In general, "-o" was the next thing I wanted to attack, as a piece
of 6515065 that's been needing attention for a while, for many
sub-commands. 

--Sowmini


Reply via email to