Re: [make-initrd] [PATCH v6 10/22] bootchain-core: expanded addressing capabilities

[Gleb Fotengauer-Malinovskiy <glebfm@altlinux.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2686 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 03:58:34PM +0200, Alexey Gladkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 02:28:53PM +0300, Leonid Krivoshein wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 26.10.2021 14:12, Alexey Gladkov пишет:
> > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2021 at 08:21:28PM +0300, Leonid Krivoshein wrote:
> > > > Adds support for reverse addressing relative to the current step,
> > > > as well as calculating the path to the special device node obtained
> > > > in the previous step.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Leonid Krivoshein <klark.devel@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   features/bootchain-core/README.md             |  6 +++
> > > >   .../data/bin/bootchain-sh-functions           | 37 ++++++++++++++++---
> > > >   2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/features/bootchain-core/README.md b/features/bootchain-core/README.md
> > > > index 8d341e0..ba66259 100644
> > > > --- a/features/bootchain-core/README.md
> > > > +++ b/features/bootchain-core/README.md
> > > > @@ -49,6 +49,12 @@ us to optimize fill in `initramfs` only which we are need.
> > > >   - Modularity: loading methods are initially separated from the common
> > > >     code and daemon.
> > > > +- Via resolve_target() supports not only forward, but also reverse addressing,
> > > > +  relative to the current step. For example, a record like `step-3/dir1/dev`
> > > > +  will process the result of `dir1/dev`, made in the third step from the current
> > > > +  one. Together with the overload of the chain of steps, direct addressing is safe
> > > > +  only when storing the numbers of the completed steps in files, whereas reverse
> > > > +  relative addressing it is safe in any case and can often be more convenient.
> > > На мой взгляд очень непонятный синтаксис. step1 и step-1 кажется
> > > одинаковым. Хотя бы current-1
> > 
> > OK. Давай переделаю так:
> > 
> > step<N> = pipe<N> -- прямая адресация, так первоначально и было.
> > curr-<N> -- обратная относительная адресация.
> > 
> > Так будет лучше?
> 
> Мне будет понятнее. Но я хотел бы спросить помощи зала.
> 
> Глеб, Антон, как вы думаете, как будет понятнее ?

Если из предложенного выбирать, то curr-<N> однозначно лучше.

Но мне кажется, что тут - не читается как минус.  Я бы скорее предложил
что-то вроде prev<N> или back<N>.

-- 
glebfm

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]