[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: bin/22546 ("netstat -in -f inet" behavior is not in sync with document)
The following reply was made to PR bin/22546; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Bug Hunting <bughunting%xs4all.nl@localhost>
To: NetBSD GNATS <gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: bin/22546 ("netstat -in -f inet" behavior is not in sync with
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 19:08:24 +0100
(This PR has been open for almost a decade; the issue described in
it, as well as the man page and code excerpts quoted in it, basically
still apply / are present though. It by the way seems that the
PR's originator wrote about code committed by himself, in this PR
(see src/usr.bin/netstat/main.c, r1.25); above that, please note
who the originator is, and take that into account before replying
(e.g., don't ask for originator feedback) -- thanks.)
I don't have a solution (patch) for the PR available here, but
_can_ provide some, hopefully helpful, comments.
First off, it looks as if the PR's originator overlooked the ``(with
the -s option)'' part from the man page's excerpt; this probably
doesn't (fully) cancel out the issue described in the PR, but note
that (at least?) the output from the specific command
"netstat -is -f inet6" _does_ differ from that of
"netstat -i -f inet6", i.e., the same command without the `-s'
Secondly, `-f' does not necessarily need to be specified _after_
`-i' for the latter to get ignored, which is described like that
specifically in the PR (and shown in its example): for `-i' to get
ignored, `-f' may be specified _anywhere_ on the command line (in
other words: don't let the wording confuse you here).
Lastly, `-n' does not need to be given for `-i' to get ignored, as
described in the PR (and shown in its examples); it was given there,
but isn't needed for the issue described to occur.
Can someone pick this PR up?
Main Index |
Thread Index |