Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose

[Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>]

On 26/10/19 9:01 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
> On 26/10/19 12:35 AM, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:56:14AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>>> On 25/10/19 7:51 AM, Anand Jain wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 24/10/19 11:41 PM, David Sterba wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 02:28:22PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
>>>>>> When both the options (--quiet and --verbose) in btrfs send and 
>>>>>> receive
>>>>>> is specified, we need at least one of it to overrule the other,
>>>>>> irrespective
>>>>>> of the chronological order of options.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the common behaviour is to respect the order of appearance on
>>>>> the commandline.
>>>>
>>>>     I am fine with this. Will fix it as this.
>>>
>>>    Question: command -v -q -v should be equal to command -v, right?
>>
>> No, that would be equivalent to the default level:
>>
>> verbose starts with 1            ()
>> verbose++                (-v)
>> verbose = 0                (-q)
>> verbose++ is now 1, which is not -v    ()
>>
> 
> Oh I was thinking its a bug, and no need to carry forward to the global
> verbose. Will make it look like this.
> 

What do you think should be the final %verbose value when both
local and global verbose and or quiet options are specified?

For example:
  btrfs -v -q sub-command -v
  btrfs -q sub-command -v
  btrfs -vv sub-command -q
  etc..

Thanks, Anand