Re: [iptables PATCH] xtables-restore: Fix --table parameter check

[Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>]

Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
> I don't quite like this check, hence I don't overly cling to it. As you
> see, checking for presence of an option in getopt() format is not easy
> and we do that for every option of every rule in a dump. Maybe we should
> really just append the explicit table param and accept that user's table
> option is not rejected but simply ignored.

I'd propose that you just push this patch out, with a few addiotnal
comments.

E.g. test script could have

# First a few inputs that should not be mistaken
# for a "-t" option:
OKLINES=
...
# Variants of -t, --table, etc. including
# multiple, concatenated short options.
NONOLINES...

For the actual code I will leave it up to you, perhaps
just include examples, e.g.

/* must catch inputs like --tab=mangle, too */
if (index(s, '=')), ..

...

As for the last part, maybe either convert it to
a loop instead of goto, or at least return right away
in match case, i.e.

switch (*s) {
case 't': return true;
case ' ': return false; /* end of options */
case '\0': return false; /* no 't' found */