On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Richard Cochran <richardcoch...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 03:31:18PM +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
> > Would it be less confusing if we introduced GNU-style long option
> > names?
>
> Not to me. PTP has tons of options, and every new profile forces more
> and more of these. I simply find it gross when programs have a
> gazillion command line options. It makes for poor usability. I
> really wanted ptp4l to have the "top ten" options available on the
> command line, in order to keep it simple for the most common use
> cases.
>
My $0.02
For an embeded linux system, I find command line args much easier to deal
with. Just pass in some $VARIABLE or maybe a $(command) in the script that
execs the command.
But for a config file, I need to edit it somehow. Maybe saving it in a
non-vol filesystem. Editing is either generating the whole file directly
or having
a template somewhere with some sed scripting (like autotools *.in) files.
A combination would be good I think. So a config file for the basic setup,
and command line overrides/additions for things that need to be
configurable or host-specific.
-Dale
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Linuxptp-devel mailing list
Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
