On 14/01/18 18:14, Neil Jerram wrote: > Thanks for looking at this, Simon. Some thoughts below... > > On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 5:34 PM Simon Kelley <si...@thekelleys.org.uk > <mailto:si...@thekelleys.org.uk>> wrote: > > I'm in favour, in theory at least, of removing arbitrary limits. > Experience has shown that no matter how big, someone, somewhere, will > always find them. The code originally used a fixed buffer which happened > to be unused at that point, to reduce the memory footprint. Whilst > dnsmasq is still intended to be "small", small is a relative thing, and > absolutely, rather bigger than it was 15 years ago, so allocating a big > enough buffer is fine. > > In this case, though, as you hint, it's likely that shell limits will > also be a problem. Even eliminating that by using configuration files, > you still have very long lines, which is ugly. > > Can't we solve this problem by allowing repeated interface names, so > > --bridge-interface=eth1,alias-1,alias-2 > > becomes identical to > > --bridge-interface=eth1,alias-1 > --bridge-interface=eth1,alias-2 > > the patch to implement that is probably smaller than your offering. > > > It looks like a nice alternative, but note that it doesn't help at all > with any shell limit. (In fact it would hit any such limit sooner.) So > I think this is a matter of what you think is more elegant for dnsmasq > itself; particularly in the configuration file context where shell > limits don't apply. > > > > > Maybe we should do both? > > > In principle I'm happy to code up and test multiple solutions here; it's > not a large amount of work in any case. So please do let me know what > you would prefer.
I'll take both, for preference. Actually - no. You test the long-options patch and I'll take that. I'll do the split-into-multiple lines one. Cheers, Simon. > > Best wishes - Neil > > > > > On 07/01/18 14:25, Neil Jerram wrote: > > Calico  with OpenStack > > (https://docs.projectcalico.org/v2.6/getting-started/openstack/) uses > > dnsmasq with a very long --bridge-interface option: > > > > > --bridge-interface=<context-if-name>,<alias-if-name>,<alias-if-name>,..., > > > > where each occurrence of ",<alias-if-name>" occupies 15 > characters, and > > there can in principle be as many <alias-if-name>s as you can have VMs > > on a single OpenStack compute host. Currently an option arg is > limited > > in dnsmasq to 1025 chars overall, which only allows for 67 > > <alias-if-name>s, which is not necessarily enough, on a powerful > compute > > host. > > > > So I wonder what folk would think about reallocating as necessary to > > allow an option arg to be arbitrarily long? (Or at least, as long as > > getopt and the containing shell will allow.) For reference I've > > attached a patch that I think would implement that - but I haven't yet > > been able to test it at all, so please don't merge it yet! > > > > Thanks in advance for your thoughts! > > Neil > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > > Dnsmasqemail@example.com > <mailto:Dnsmasqfirstname.lastname@example.org> > > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list > Dnsmasqemail@example.com > <mailto:Dnsmasqfirstname.lastname@example.org> > http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss > _______________________________________________ Dnsmasq-discuss mailing list Dnsmasqemail@example.com http://lists.thekelleys.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dnsmasq-discuss