In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Changed implementation such that fw_printenv returns failure status when one
> or more specified variables do not exist or when incorrect command syntax is
> used.
>
> This aids scripting fw_printenv such that the script can key of the return
> status
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> The "-n" option is not a new feature. It already existed in the code prior
> to my changes.
Argh! You are right. This option has been there right from the first
version. And guess who wrote that code.
I apologize for all the false alarms.
Now where i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> Anyway, hopefully Wolfgang can ACK the patch as is and I can look at
> extending the "-n" option as another separate effort.
No, I will not ACK it, as it adds features which are not even
mentioned in the commit message.
> PS: To which documentation ar
Dear Grant,
Grant Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for the comments. As suggested by Wolfgang, the "-n" option was
> pre-existing in the code before my patch.
>
> I can investigate extending "-n" as described above; however, the caveat is
> that the user knows that the values of some
On 5/7/08 12:29 AM, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 20:16 -0700, Grant Erickson wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] fw_printenv foobar
>> ## Error: "foobar" not defined
>
> This error message should not be there. It is enough to return exit
> status 1. Then one does not have to redirect st
On 5/7/08 12:10 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] fw_printenv -n hostname ipaddr
>>> ## Error: `-n' option requires exactly one argument
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo $?
>>> 1
>>
>> But I don't understand what the purpose of the "-n" option
On 5/7/08 12:32 AM, Markus Klotzbücher wrote:
> Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> Oh right, yes. Shouldn't post to lists before drinking coffee in the
> morning.
>
>> However, the addition of this feature is undocumented (not mentioned
>> in t
Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] fw_printenv -n hostname ipaddr
>> >## Error: `-n' option requires exactly one argument
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] echo $?
>> >1
>>
>> But I don't understand what the purpose
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 20:16 -0700, Grant Erickson wrote:
> Changed implementation such that fw_printenv returns failure status when one
> or more specified variables do not exist or when incorrect command syntax is
> used.
>
> This aids scripting fw_printenv such that the script can key of the
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] fw_printenv -n hostname ipaddr
> > ## Error: `-n' option requires exactly one argument
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] echo $?
> > 1
>
> But I don't understand what the purpose of the "-n" option is?
The purpose seems clear
Dear Grant,
Grant Erickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Changed implementation such that fw_printenv returns failure status when one
> or more specified variables do not exist or when incorrect command syntax is
> used.
>
> This aids scripting fw_printenv such that the script can key of the re
Changed implementation such that fw_printenv returns failure status when one or
more specified variables do not exist or when incorrect command syntax is used.
This aids scripting fw_printenv such that the script can key of the return
status rather than relying on standard error "scraping".
T
12 matches
Mail list logo
