Hi, Alan Somers <asom...@freebsd.org> wrote in <201908231522.x7nfmluj068...@repo.freebsd.org>:
as> Author: asomers as> Date: Fri Aug 23 15:22:20 2019 as> New Revision: 351423 as> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/351423 as> as> Log: as> ping6: Rename options for better consistency with ping as> as> Now equivalent options have the same flags, and nonequivalent options have as> different flags. This is a prelude to merging the two commands. as> as> Submitted by: Ján Sučan <sucan...@gmail.com> as> MFC: Never as> Sponsored by: Google LLC (Google Summer of Code 2019) as> Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D21345 I have an objection on renaming the existing option flags in ping6(8) for compatibility with ping(8). Is it sufficient to add INET6 support to ping(8) with consistent flags and keep CLI of ping6(8) backward compatible? People have used ping6(8) for >15 years, so it is too late to rename the flags. I do not think the renaming is useful if "ping -6 localhost" or "ping ::1" works. -- Hiroki
pgpHeEsSuEm7_.pgp
Description: PGP signature
