Dear all,
I'm not an OpenWRT dev, just a lurker on the mailing list & a sometime user of OpenWRT. (Thank you to all the devs & maintainers of OpenWRT & packages, btw.) So, my view might not count for much, but ... On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 09:36:03PM -0400, Eric Luehrsen wrote: > I did a comparison, which gave about a 500 byte increase [..] I'd say > that difference is acceptable [..] > > Unless there is an overwhelming size cost, basic POSIX binaries should > be provided "POSIX'ly correct" by default. [..] On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 11:26:23AM -0700, Jordan Geoghegan wrote: > On 2020-07-11 06:08, Magnus Kroken wrote: >> [..] Making tr compliant when it's there anyway and has this small >> cost is good. [..] > > [..] I agree about having to make certain sacrifices in order to > remain usable on smaller devices, the only reason I brought it up was > due to the dangerous way in which 'tr' was configured to ignore > character classes and treat all characters literally, rather than at > least printing an error. I'm glad to see you've decided to re-enable > tr POSIX stuff. Thanks :) ... I agree with Eric, Magnus & Jordan: POSIX-compliance is *definitely* worth implementing when the size cost is negligible, as it is in this case. It will reduce the risk of bugs in cases where: - OpenWRT devs or package maintainers, e.g. new ones, might assume POSIX-compliant `tr` behaviour (& might forget to test for non-compliance); or - third-party package authors do likewise. Such bugs could end up having subtle & insidious effects, hard to diagnose. So, I would be grateful if the OpenWRT devs would make the suggested change to the default Busybox compilation option. (I say this as someone who owns one or two 4/32 devices, so please don't think I'm not conscious of size constraints.) > I'm not sure if there's any interest in making use of tr+classes for > base system scripts, but I'd be happy to go through and start cleaning > stuff up if there is interest. > > Attached please find a patch for > "package/network/services/hostapd/files/hostapd.sh" [..] I also agree with Jordan's suggestion to fix OpenWRT base system scripts so that they would use `tr` classes instead of attempting to work around the current POSIX non-compliance by using literal ranges. This way, users - especially users who change locales - will be less likely to experience bugs. We're not in the pre-Unicode, pre-globalisation era anymore. OpenWRT is used internationally & no user should be penalised for switching locales or performing other innocent actions that could trigger bugs with the current scripts. So, I would also be glad if Jordan's suggestion (& patch) could be accepted. Thank you for hearing me out, & thanks again for developing/maintaining OpenWRT! Sam -- A: When it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: When is top-posting a bad thing? () ASCII ribbon campaign. Please avoid HTML emails & proprietary /\ file formats. (Why? See e.g. https://v.gd/jrmGbS ). Thank you. _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
