On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 02:10:30PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 03/22/2012 01:59 PM, Dave Allan wrote:
> > ---
> > tools/virsh.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/virsh.c b/tools/virsh.c
> > index 9e5c9b2..d9cff0c 100644
> > --- a/tools/virsh.c
> > +++ b/tools/virsh.c
> > @@ -4742,7 +4742,7 @@ static const vshCmdInfo info_freecell[] = {
> > };
> >
> > static const vshCmdOptDef opts_freecell[] = {
> > - {"cellno", VSH_OT_INT, 0, N_("NUMA cell number")},
> > + {"cellno", VSH_OT_INT, VSH_OFLAG_REQ, N_("NUMA cell number")},
>
> NACK. VSH_OFLAG_REQ means required, absence of that flag (ie. using 0
> for the flag) means optional. This patch would break the command by
> requiring a --cellno argument, even with --all.
>
> This is the current 'virsh help freecell' output, without your patch:
>
> $ virsh help freecell
> NAME
> freecell - NUMA free memory
>
> SYNOPSIS
> freecell [--cellno <number>] [--all]
>
> DESCRIPTION
> display available free memory for the NUMA cell.
>
> OPTIONS
> --cellno <number> NUMA cell number
> --all show free memory for all NUMA cells
>
> It shows that both --cellno and --all are optional; however, what it
> does not show (and cannot show, without a lot more work throughout
> virsh), is the notion of mutual exclusion (that is, there is no trivial
> way to make virsh help output the {} operators to show the alternation
> that the virsh.pod has by hand).
Ok, that's what I was afraid someone was going to say. We can kill
that patch as far as I'm concerned.
Dave
> --
> Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-919-301-3266
> Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
>
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list