[syslinux] Issues with syslinux_run_command(str) and parameters

[Geert Stappers]

Op 2014-05-05 om 23:20 schreef Ady:
>
> > I didn't see any further communication here; would anyone be
> > against my submitting/proposing a patch for this?
>
> Contributions are always welcome.
>
> >
> > I can see two possible approaches. One approach would be to
> > isolate the restriction on user commands away from
> > syslinux_run_command / load_kernel.
> >
> > Another would perhaps be to add support for a 'NOTAB' or
> > 'NOTABTOEDIT' option. There already exists a NOESCAPE setting, so
> > the remaining piece would be restricting tab. (And perhaps holding
> > shift to get to the console.. Hmm.)
> >
> > I would appreciate any suggestions :)
> >
> > Thank you,--Ian
> >
>
> >From the perspective of a final user, breaking the prior behavior of
> directives needs to have very clear advantages.

Reviewing the commit history, I would say that the prior behavior is currently broken.

The ALLOWOPTIONS feature was added in 2004:
http://git.zytor.com/?p=syslinux/syslinux.git;a=commit;h=975a4c3b343c09a340d95f1a2a4ece3556c57a10
And syslinux_run_command() in 2007:
http://git.zytor.com/?p=syslinux/syslinux.git;a=commit;h=0b3b862ff49ab1b0b5d5af8c15d58e3c4baaf634

At this point, syslinux_run_command is using the equivalent of
create_args_and_load(), a function that is *not* negatively affected
by ALLOWOPTIONS.

The behavior was changed in 2013 to use load_kernel to *add* label support:
http://git.zytor.com/?p=syslinux/syslinux.git;a=commit;h=04f40bc55ed4f39d6c625b017bb16907f7d50c05

At this point the 8 or 9 com32 modules I listed earlier stopped working
when ALLOWOPTIONS was set. This is a change from the previous 6 years
of behavior.

But, if we still have different views on this, it looks like ALLOWOPTIONS
is internally referred to as 'allowedit' in the menu code. Perhaps
we can separate them there, maintaining an ALLOWOPTIONS' variable for
load_kernel to check, but also adding a ALLOWEDIT option that the menu
can use to restrict the Tab to edit functionality.

Thoughts?


   ---------

That text came from a message that I undercepted as moderator.
It was labor some excirise that probably did more harm to the discussion
then the abuse of the discussion order by top quoting.


Groeten
Geert Stappers
--
Leven en laten leven