On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Claudio Jeker <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 01:47:53PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 12:27:10PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> > > On 2016/04/12 13:00, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > > Relying on the "scopeid" field is not a viable long-term solution.
> I'm
> > > > spending too much time these days trying to figure out which
> interface
> > > > correspond to which index.
> > > >
> > > > Here's a difference in output, then the diff itself. ok?
> > > >
> > > > @@ -1,31 +1,29 @@
> > > > lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 32768
> > > > + index 4
> > > > priority: 0
> > > > groups: lo
> > > > inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
> > > > inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4
> > > > inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
> > > > em0:
> flags=18b43<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,ALLMULTI,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST,MPSAFE>
> mtu 1500
> > > > - lladdr f0:de:f9:1d:88:53
> > > > + index 1 lladdr f0:de:f9:1d:88:53
> > >
> > > This will break scripts, e.g. "awk '/lladdr/ {print $2}'"
> > >
> > > I would expect putting it after lladdr would be better for the sort
> > > of scripts a user is likely to write, but bsd.rd would need a change
> > > if that was done, it uses sed 's/.*lladdr \(.*\)/\1/p;d'
> > >
> > > On a new line would be safer.
> >
> > How about appending to the flags line, like this?
> >
> > lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 32768 index 4
> >
>
> Or on the line with priority? The risk of breaking scripts that way is
> probably smaller.
>
> --
> :wq Claudio
>
>
my 2 cents:
new line please, or only with an option like -vv
so you can alias it and no one see it, but you.
still advocating for a structured output of system commands like ifconfig
-json,
new scripts would be able to manage those changes better.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\
