[Toybox] [PATCH] Fix address family help text

[Eric Molitor]

I'll send over another set of changes shortly that refactors display_routes
to use netlink. The changes will probably be controversial as they increase
code size a bit but were useful for me to understand rtnetlink a bit
better. They also setup another set of patches which unify display_route to
support both ipv4 and ipv6 as well as to start refactoring the rest of
route.c to use rtnetlink.

- Eric

On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 12:17 AM Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:

> On 5/16/20 5:39 AM, Eric Molitor wrote:
> > ---
> >  toys/pending/route.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/toys/pending/route.c b/toys/pending/route.c
> > index 1fd3b55f..b4e7ea0d 100644
> > --- a/toys/pending/route.c
> > +++ b/toys/pending/route.c
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ config ROUTE
> >    bool "route"
> >    default n
> >    help
> > -    usage: route [-ne] [-A [46]] [add|del TARGET [OPTIONS]]
> > +    usage: route [-ne] [-A [inet|inet6]] [add|del TARGET [OPTIONS]]
> >
> >      Display, add or delete network routes in the "Forwarding
> Information Base".
>
> Sigh. The ping stuff isn't two completely unrelated codepaths to support
> ipv6,
> it autodetects based on the address you specify, and only lets you specify
> to
> force name lookups to use a category when there are multiple responses (and
> abort when it hasn't got that type).
>
> And yes, I tested "ping -I 127.0.0.1 ::1" and such first thing:
>
>   https://landley.net/notes-2017.html#16-07-2017
>
> (And doing proper tests/ping.test is one of the things I hope "make root
> tests"
> lets me do...)
>
> Applied, but there are a number of reasons route is still in pending and
> this
> doesn't move it _towards_ getting out. :)
>
> Rob
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.landley.net/pipermail/toybox-landley.net/attachments/20200517/e20f27e3/attachment.htm>