Syslinux - Jan 2008 - tftp client patch

Hi, All!

I'm looking for tftp-hpa package maintainer. I've implemented verbose
error code reporting (aka verbose exit status) for tftp client, so any
program which runs it can determine whether it succeeded or failed and
if failed, why. It's especially useful for writing scripts which use
tftp. Current version almost always reports success (exit status 0)
and practically not usable in scripts.
I would be glad if my patch would be integrated into the mainstream
code. I've wrote the patch for version 0.42, but if the maintainer is
interested, I can port it to the latest version.

Also, digging the code I've found several places with unreachable code
and wrong treatment of function return codes. It looks harmless, but
may lead to additional bugs in the future. So I'd like to discuss them
too.

If I am writing to the wrong address, please point me to the right
one. Otherwise I'd ask the maintainer to reply to me privately or to
the list (I've subscribed to it recently).

Regards,
Ilia.

Ilia K. wrote:
> Hi, All!
> 
> I'm looking for tftp-hpa package maintainer. I've implemented
verbose
> error code reporting (aka verbose exit status) for tftp client, so any
> program which runs it can determine whether it succeeded or failed and
> if failed, why. It's especially useful for writing scripts which use
> tftp. Current version almost always reports success (exit status 0)
> and practically not usable in scripts.
> I would be glad if my patch would be integrated into the mainstream
> code. I've wrote the patch for version 0.42, but if the maintainer is
> interested, I can port it to the latest version.
> 
Please, that would be useful.  The best is if you can submit patches in 
the style of git-compatible patches (see 
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/SubmittingPatches;hb=HEAD)
against the git tree or latest version.
> Also, digging the code I've found several places with unreachable code
> and wrong treatment of function return codes. It looks harmless, but
> may lead to additional bugs in the future. So I'd like to discuss them
> too.
I'm not surprised; the underlying BSD code is awful.

The client is not really my focus, obviously, so I'm more than happy 
when someone is willing to step up and help.

	-hpa