From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ipv6: Change %pI6 format to output compacted addresses?
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 00:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20090814.001519.40499255.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <1250198022.28285.133.camel@Joe-Laptop.home>
	<20090813.163133.199571497.davem@davemloft.net>
	<1250230925.6641.92.camel@fnki-nb00130>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: joe@perches.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com, brian.haley@hp.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: jens@mcbone.net
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:36416
	"EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755259AbZHNHPI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:15:08 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1250230925.6641.92.camel@fnki-nb00130>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Jens Rosenboom <jens@mcbone.net>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 08:22:05 +0200

> On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 16:31 -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
>> Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:13:42 -0700
>> 
>> > On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 17:02 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> >> [ I would think user space in general should be using inet_pton(3)  
>> >> everywhere for such interfaces, so the format of these addresses  
>> >> wouldn't matter so much.  Probably impossible at this point. ]
>> > 
>> > David Miller is authoritative here.
>> 
>> In the final analysis, the risk is just too high to break
>> userspace.  So let's play conservative here and not change
>> the output for currently user visible stuff.
> 
> So just to clarify, do you want us to drop the whole thread and stay
> with the clumsy output, or would you be o.k. with adding a new 
> %p{something} and use that for kernel messages and maybe do some slow
> migration of other stuff where possible?

You tell me what part of this you don't understand:

	So let's play conservative here and not change
	the output for currently user visible stuff.

I can't figure out a way to express that more clearly than I did.