From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Cc: dsterba@suse.cz, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 18:35:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191025163555.GP3001@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7b97f0ce-1f62-09fa-ad86-6a4d0af40e1d@oracle.com>
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 ()
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-25 16:35 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 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] btrfs-progs: make quiet to overrule verbose David Sterba
2019-10-24 23:51 ` Anand Jain
2019-10-25 1:56 ` Anand Jain
2019-10-25 16:35 ` David Sterba [this message]
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=20191025163555.GP3001@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).