On Nov 11 08:30, Brian Inglis wrote: > On 2019-11-11 02:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > On Nov 11 10:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> On Nov 10 09:14, Brian Inglis wrote: > >> The patch idea is nice. Two nits, though. > >> Please shorten the commit msg summary line and add a bit of descriptive > >> text instead. > > Sorry, I forget and don't notice longer than standard messages, from using > 120x60 or larger windows. > > >>> --- > >>> winsup/utils/regtool.cc | 13 ++++++++++++- > >>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/winsup/utils/regtool.cc b/winsup/utils/regtool.cc > >>> index a44d90768..ddb1304cd 100644 > >>> --- a/winsup/utils/regtool.cc > >>> +++ b/winsup/utils/regtool.cc > >>> @@ -167,7 +167,9 @@ usage (FILE *where = stderr) > >>> " users HKU HKEY_USERS\n" > >>> "\n" > >>> "If the keyname starts with a forward slash ('/'), the forward > >>> slash is used\n" > >>> - "as separator and the backslash can be used as escape > >>> character.\n"); > >>> + "as separator and the backslash can be used as escape character.\n" > >>> + "If the keyname starts with /proc/registry{,32,64}/, using forward > >>> or backward\n" > >>> + "slashes, allowing path completion, that part of the prefix is > >>> ignored.\n"); > >> > >> Is that really essential user information? > > Absolutely essential! > > >> I assume this behaviour is something you just expected to work but then > >> didn't. With your patch it now works as you expected. So it's kind of > >> a bugfix, rather than a change of behaviour the user needs to learn about. > > To those with similar background or experience it may appear that it should be > supported, but hasn't been until now. > > It is definitely not expected behaviour, given how regedit, reg, etc. expect > only hive paths, and how the the current regtool --help reads, clearly > expecting > Windows style backslash separated registry paths, probably pasted within > single > quotes. That expectation is changed somewhat by the forward slash sentence. > Further changes to expectation needs more documentation. > > >> The above text is, IMHO, more confusing than helpful to a user just > >> asking for regtool --help. I'd just drop it. > > It needs documented because it can not in any way be inferred from the > existing > regtool ---help, and would not be expected, that it should work. It was never > previously supported or seen as helpful or necessary, so it should be seen as > a > non-obvious "surprising" addition, in the opposite sense to "least surprise". > > Please someone suggest better wording for the help, as that is the only > documentation available, and is needed, to update existing and inform new > users. > Like the code, I tried to maintain the style of the existing help. > > As an alternative, how about: > "To support path completion, a keyname prefix of /proc/registry{,32,64}/ is > ignored."
Ok, we can add something to the help text, but the text still sounds confusing, even the altenative one. I think the reason is the negative expression "ignore" here. Why not express this in a positive way like this: "Use the /proc/registry{,32,64}/ registry path prefix to utilize path completion." Something like that anyway. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature