[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