linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] get_maintainer.pl: improve config-file support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 12 May 2010 15:28:53 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	florian@...kler.org
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] get_maintainer.pl: improve config-file support

On Wed, 2010-05-12 at 23:12 +0200, florian@...kler.org wrote:
> This changes the syntax of the config-file introduced in the commit
> "scripts/get_maintainer.pl: add .get_maintainer.conf default options
> file".
> Entries are now of the more commonly found form:
> 	key = value
> where keys are cmd-line arguments without the "--" prefixed.

I don't have a strong opinion one way or another about the
.conf file format.

Another option which could be useful:  --noconf, don't read the file.

> as well as warn if unrecognized options are
> specified.

The old approach does that as well.

> +if (!GetOptions( \%prefs,

I think you don't need to repeat the options.
Doesn't this work?
	if (!GetOptions(\%prefs)) {
	    die "$P: invalid argument - use --help if necessary\n";


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/