From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 9816] New: cannot replace route Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 12:40:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20080126114036.GA2624@ami.dom.local> References: <20080125142603.a73fd7a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <479A6CBD.4010908@gmail.com> <20080125192026.e667f396.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andrew Morton , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, schwab@suse.de To: Joonwoo Park Return-path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.170]:53816 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751526AbYAZLhj (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2008 06:37:39 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z38so662265ugc.16 for ; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:37:37 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 02:16:01PM +0900, Joonwoo Park wrote: > 2008/1/26, Andrew Morton : > > > > But whatever. It used to work. People's scripts will break. Regression. > > > > Also I thought that 'replace with itself' should be error as like Jarek. > But it used to work and patch made a regression, it's my bad :( Actually, I don't think 'replace with itself' should be an error. I've only meant that lack of this possibility shouldn't be necessarily seen as error - there could be arguments for both sides. IMHO, there should be simply analyzed pros and cons of doing it in this particular place, so: if there is any gain in doing this, and if possible complications or problems with performance, security etc. don't prevail such a gain. And I don't think a regression argument should be valid at all if there are removed any unlogical, error-prone or otherwise problematic options (I don't know if this is such case), even if they are not obvious bugs - especially if it's still possible to do the same 'proper' way. Regards, Jarek P.