From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: how to suppress progress percentage in git-push Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:25:18 -0500 Message-ID: <20091123192518.GA1607@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20091122145352.GA3941@debian.b2j> <20091123145959.GA13138@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: bill lam , git To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 23 20:25:33 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NCeXU-0000wq-Ju for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:25:32 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755573AbZKWTZQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:25:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755498AbZKWTZQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:25:16 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:53020 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753866AbZKWTZP (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:25:15 -0500 Received: (qmail 4323 invoked by uid 107); 23 Nov 2009 19:29:43 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:29:43 -0500 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:25:18 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:56:43AM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > We need to do one of: > > > > 1. make --all-progress imply "if we are using progress, then make it > > more verbose. Otherwise, ignore." > > > > 2. fix all callers to check isatty(2) before unconditionally passing > > the option > > None of the above would fix the issue as this only affects progress > display for phase #3. You'd still get progress display for the counting > phase and the compressing phase. I think it does fix the issue, as it is exactly the side effect that we are concerned about (and I tested my patch for 1, which squelched it). But your --all-progress-implied is a better fix, so I think we should go with that. > That doesn't mean it is OK for send-pack to unconditionally use > --all-progress though, although it does provide the -q argument to > pack-objects when push -q is used which inhibits any progress display > already. It does, and I almost suggested that (although -q is new as of 1.6.5, so it may not help the original poster). But "-q" actually does more than that; it also silences any output for a successful push, which may not be desired. -Peff