[syslinux] [5.10] PXE + dhcp opts 209, 210 and path issues in tftp/http

Ady ady-sf at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 12 07:01:13 PDT 2013


> 
> OK, how about something like this? It also change the internal PATH into
> a linked list instead of requiring us to parse a string constantly;
> which was complete madness.
> 
> Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
 
Perhaps the following is just a crazy idea... How about no 
path-separator in the cfg file, and instead use multiple PATH 
directives for each path in the cfg file?

Instead of the previous:
PATH first_path:2nd_path

now just use:
PATH first_path
PATH 2nd_path

If this syntax would be possible (while multiple paths in one line 
would be "unsupported"), then each PATH directive would accept only 
one path in the cfg file. Each PATH directive would add more paths, 
in the same order they appear in the cfg file. Then parse them with 
whichever adequate method you can think of.

Potentially, you could also name this "new" directive with some other 
word, instead of "PATH", and just "un-document" the previous 
"multiple paths separated by ":" in the PATH directive and "forget 
about it". Instead, document this "new" directive with relevant 
syntax and rules (which are *mostly* the same as the previous PATH 
directive, except for the new syntax not accepting multiple paths in 
the same directive line in the cfg file).

Perhaps this new imposed restricted syntax might not solve the 
"white-space character in paths" nor other potential collisions (":", 
";", etc.) in your code (which I have no idea about, not being a 
developer myself), but from the user's perspective, the cfg file is 
still simple enough.

In this "new" directive, whatever is written after the "new PATH" 
keyword, is one and only one path, "as-is", till the end of the line.

If this idea is too crazy, or not feasible and/or doesn't really 
improve anything for future code maintenance, just forget about this 
email.

Best Regards,
Ady.



More information about the Syslinux mailing list