From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Clemens Buchacher Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsck: do not print dangling objects by default Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:18:24 +0100 Message-ID: <20120227221820.GA1194@ecki> References: <20120226204357.GA26088@ecki> <7vty2ddzqj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vhayddxgp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120227191846.GB1600@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vr4xg6pn2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120227211316.GA29081@ecki> <20120227213304.GB19779@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 27 23:26:56 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S291y-0002j4-U6 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:26:55 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755907Ab2B0W0t (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 17:26:49 -0500 Received: from bsmtp4.bon.at ([195.3.86.186]:45915 "EHLO bsmtp.bon.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755899Ab2B0W0s (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 17:26:48 -0500 Received: from localhost (p5B22E80B.dip.t-dialin.net [91.34.232.11]) by bsmtp.bon.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22AAD13004D; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 23:26:45 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120227213304.GB19779@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 04:33:04PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 10:13:16PM +0100, Clemens Buchacher wrote: > > > > Yes, that was certainly part of my pros-and-cons analysis. If you run > > > "git fsck" without "--no-dangling" without reading the manual, you may > > > get confused, but that is *not* the primary audience. > > > > It is not my only concern that users might be confused. I believe the > > command prints a lot of useless messages, which is by itself a UI > > deficiency. But even worse, those numerous messages tend to hide an > > actual problem in a long scrollback buffer. Sometimes my scrollback > > buffer is not even large enough and I have to re-run fsck (which is not > > exactly a fast command), just so I can grep out the dangling blobs. > > Yeah, but doesn't adding "--no-dangling" solve that issue? I can just as well use grep -v ^dangling.