On 04/16/2013 12:27 PM, Chandra Seetharaman wrote: > Hello All, > > While trying to replace xfs_check with xfs_repair -n in xfstests, I > found that xfs_check is quiet if all is well, and prints information > only if something is wrong. But, xfs_repair -n always prints information > on different phases etc., > > What should be our approach ? > 1. add a -q option to xfs_repair, which prints no message at all > 2. add a -q option, and it will be quiet, but is valid only if -n > is specified. > 3. Leave it as is. Since users have to change their scripts anyways to > replace xfs_check, they can as well change the logic around the > output. I like option 1 the best. But any of them is reasonable. -Alex > Please suggest. > > Regards, > > Chandra . . . _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
