On Mar 12, 2006, at 8:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I worry a bit about the multiple-property case -- e.g.:
$ dladm show-prop power-mode,radio ath0
... feels more comfortable to me *with* the leading "-p":
$ dladm show-prop -p power-mode,radio ath0
However, I do agree with your overall point. Does anyone else have
any
strong opinions on this topic? If so, please speak up :-)
I think that we should be consistent with the current dladm(1M)
interface and keep one operand and separate options.
Further, I'm still uneasy about the object of the *-prop subcommands
being links. This is not consistent with the existing dladm(1M)
usage, where verb and type of object are concatenated to form the
various subcommand names. With the proposed *-prop options, this
would imply that the objects are properties are the objects, when the
objects are really the links.
To be consistent with the current dladm(1M) model, the property
subcommands should be made specific to the type of objects they
correspond to, e.g. setprop-link, getprop-link, showprop-link. This
would be also compliant with the latest CLIP guidelines.
Nicolas.
--
Nicolas Droux, Solaris Networking
[EMAIL PROTECTED], http://blogs.sun.com/droux
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
