linux-btrfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 17:41:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024154151.GI3001@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191024062825.13097-1-anand.jain@oracle.com>

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. So 'command -vvv -q' will be the same as 'command -q',
while 'command -q -vvv' will be 'command -vvv'.

Eg. ssh behaves like that, OTOH rsync does not and -q beats -vvv. I
don't know about other commands that accept multiple -v and -q to get
more samples. The usage pattern where order on command line matters is
following the idea where there's a long line and adding -vvv to the end
will make it verbose.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-10-24 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-24  6:28 [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose Anand Jain
2019-10-24  6:28 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] btrfs-progs: send: let option quiet " Anand Jain
2019-10-24  6:28 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] btrfs-progs: receive: " Anand Jain
2019-10-24  6:28 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] btrfs-progs: receive: make quiet really quiet Anand Jain
2019-10-24 15:41 ` David Sterba [this message]
2019-10-24 23:51   ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose Anand Jain
2019-10-25  1:56     ` Anand Jain
2019-10-25 16:35       ` David Sterba
2019-10-26  1:01         ` Anand Jain
2019-10-29 19:42           ` Anand Jain
2019-11-01 15:18             ` David Sterba
2019-11-04  6:26               ` Anand Jain

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191024154151.GI3001@twin.jikos.cz \
    --to=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=anand.jain@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).