On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 10:28:16PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 11:24:29PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
On Mon, Dec 02, 2024 at 09:39:15PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
Mhh the problem seems to be -c
Let me post some outputs...
root@OpenWrt:~# ping -V ping from iputils 20240117 libcap: no, IDN: no, NLS: no, error.h: no, getrandom(): yes, __fpending(): yes root@OpenWrt:~# ping -c 10 192.168.1.1 PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.102 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.084 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.236 ms ^C --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 3 received, 0% packet loss, time 2080ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.084/0.140/0.236/0.067 ms root@OpenWrt:~# ping 192.168.1.1 -c 10 ping: -c: Name does not resolve
As you can see swapping the ip cause this "Name does not resolve" error.
Ok, I opened the iputils source code and there isn't any relevant recent change there. But it uses getopt(3), and that seems to be implemented more simplistically for musl libc: https://wiki.musl-libc.org/functional-differences-from-glibc.html "musl and the POSIX standard getopt stop processing options at the first non-option argument with no permutation."
On GNU libc: $ ping 192.168.1.1 -c 1 PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.696 ms
--- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.696/0.696/0.696/0.000 ms
Well it's definitely that... As we use musl as glibc is BIIIG and won't ever fit 4mb of flash ahahha
Also I just notice msend suffer the very same problem...
root@OpenWrt:~# ip vrf exec vlan1 msend -g ff2e::0102:0304 -I lan1 -c 1 Now sending to multicast group: [ff2e::0102:0304]:4444 sendto: Address family not supported by protocol root@OpenWrt:~# ip vrf exec vlan1 msend -I lan1 -c -g 1ff2e::0102:0304 Now sending to multicast group: [224.1.1.1]:4444 Sending msg 1, TTL 1, to [224.1.1.1]:4444: Sending msg 2, TTL 1, to [224.1.1.1]:4444:
Ignore the last part about msend... just me messing around...