| 1 |
Hi all, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
this bug was filed against OpenRc today [1]. The issue was that the user |
| 4 |
was attempting to use bash arrays, which, as far as I knew are not |
| 5 |
supported in OpenRc. The migration guide and net.example both do not use |
| 6 |
them, so if the user followed all of the migration steps, they wouldn't be |
| 7 |
using them either. That is why I marked this bug invalid. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Further research lead me to find that we have an undocumented way of |
| 10 |
supporting bash arrays for some variables in OpenRc, but not others. I |
| 11 |
have opened this bug to discuss the topic [2]. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
bash arrays are not documented anywhere as far as OpenRc is concerned. |
| 14 |
All of the examples in net.example and the |
| 15 |
baselayout/openrc migration guide do not use them. Also, this is not a |
| 16 |
posix feature, so supporting it technically goes against OpenRc's |
| 17 |
design. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is, what is the technical |
| 20 |
advantage for bash arrays as compared to using strings the way things |
| 21 |
are shown in net.example? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
If there isn't one, would there be a lot of objections to me removing |
| 24 |
this code? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Thoughts? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
William |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374821 |
| 31 |
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374875 |
Archives