[PATCH] regtool: Ignore /proc/registry{,32,64}/ prefix, with forward or backslashes, allowing path completion

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Nov 11 08:30, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2019-11-11 02:19, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Nov 11 10:13, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> On Nov 10 09:14, Brian Inglis wrote:
> >> The patch idea is nice.  Two nits, though.
> >> Please shorten the commit msg summary line and add a bit of descriptive
> >> text instead.
> 
> Sorry, I forget and don't notice longer than standard messages, from using
> 120x60 or larger windows.
> 
> >>> ---
> >>>  winsup/utils/regtool.cc | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/winsup/utils/regtool.cc b/winsup/utils/regtool.cc
> >>> index a44d90768..ddb1304cd 100644
> >>> --- a/winsup/utils/regtool.cc
> >>> +++ b/winsup/utils/regtool.cc
> >>> @@ -167,7 +167,9 @@ usage (FILE *where = stderr)
> >>>        "  users    HKU   HKEY_USERS\n"
> >>>        "\n"
> >>>        "If the keyname starts with a forward slash ('/'), the forward slash is used\n"
> >>> -      "as separator and the backslash can be used as escape character.\n");
> >>> +      "as separator and the backslash can be used as escape character.\n"
> >>> +      "If the keyname starts with /proc/registry{,32,64}/, using forward or backward\n"
> >>> +      "slashes, allowing path completion, that part of the prefix is ignored.\n");
> >>
> >> Is that really essential user information?
> 
> Absolutely essential!
> 
> >> I assume this behaviour is something you just expected to work but then
> >> didn't.  With your patch it now works as you expected.  So it's kind of
> >> a bugfix, rather than a change of behaviour the user needs to learn about.
> 
> To those with similar background or experience it may appear that it should be
> supported, but hasn't been until now.
> 
> It is definitely not expected behaviour, given how regedit, reg, etc. expect
> only hive paths, and how the the current regtool --help reads, clearly expecting
> Windows style backslash separated registry paths, probably pasted within single
> quotes. That expectation is changed somewhat by the forward slash sentence.
> Further changes to expectation needs more documentation.
> 
> >> The above text is, IMHO, more confusing than helpful to a user just
> >> asking for regtool --help.  I'd just drop it.
> 
> It needs documented because it can not in any way be inferred from the existing
> regtool ---help, and would not be expected, that it should work. It was never
> previously supported or seen as helpful or necessary, so it should be seen as a
> non-obvious "surprising" addition, in the opposite sense to "least surprise".
> 
> Please someone suggest better wording for the help, as that is the only
> documentation available, and is needed, to update existing and inform new users.
> Like the code, I tried to maintain the style of the existing help.
> 
> As an alternative, how about:
> "To support path completion, a keyname prefix of /proc/registry{,32,64}/ is
> ignored."

Ok, we can add something to the help text, but the text still sounds
confusing, even the altenative one.  I think the reason is the negative
expression "ignore" here.  Why not express this in a positive way like
this:

  "Use the /proc/registry{,32,64}/ registry path prefix to utilize path
   completion."

Something like that anyway.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin-patches/attachments/20191111/9343a58b/attachment.sig>