From: Kjetil Barvik <barvik@broadpark.no>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] [squash] fsck: revert --quick to the default and introduce --medium
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:37:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <861vulqb1o.fsf@broadpark.no> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1233313517-24208-6-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
<snipp>
> diff --git a/builtin-fsck.c b/builtin-fsck.c
> index 72bf33b..83faa98 100644
> --- a/builtin-fsck.c
> +++ b/builtin-fsck.c
> @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ static int show_tags;
> static int show_unreachable;
> static int include_reflogs = 1;
> static int check_full;
> -static int check_quick;
> +static int check_medium;
> static int check_strict;
> static int keep_cache_objects;
> static unsigned char head_sha1[20];
> @@ -578,7 +578,7 @@ static struct option fsck_opts[] = {
> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "cache", &keep_cache_objects, "make index objects head nodes"),
> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "reflogs", &include_reflogs, "make reflogs head nodes (default)"),
> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "full", &check_full, "fully check packs"),
> - OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "quick", &check_quick, "only check loose objects"),
> + OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "medium", &check_medium, "also check packs"),
> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "strict", &check_strict, "enable more strict checking"),
> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "lost-found", &write_lost_and_found,
> "write dangling objects in .git/lost-found"),
> @@ -594,8 +594,8 @@ int cmd_fsck(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> errors_found = 0;
>
> argc = parse_options(argc, argv, fsck_opts, fsck_usage, 0);
> - if (check_full && check_quick)
> - die("--full and --quick? which one do you want?");
> + if (check_full && check_medium)
> + die("--full and --medium? which one do you want?");
>
Would it not be better to have an "OPT_INT" argument named
"check_level" or similar?
Then you do not need those error checks, and people would maybe
better understand the differences between the different check's?
The documentation could then say that (for example) "level 2
includes all check's that level 1 includes, in addition to ...".
-- kjetil
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-30 11:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-30 11:05 [PATCH 0/5] fsck updates Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:05 ` [PATCH 1/5] pack-check.c: minor formatting fix to match coding style Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] verify_pack(): allow a quicker verification for a pack with version 2 idx Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:05 ` [PATCH 3/5] verify-pack: add --quick Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:05 ` [PATCH 4/5] fsck: three levels of validation Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:05 ` [PATCH 5/5] [squash] fsck: revert --quick to the default and introduce --medium Junio C Hamano
2009-01-30 11:37 ` Kjetil Barvik [this message]
2009-01-31 21:45 ` [PATCH 1/5] pack-check.c: minor formatting fix to match coding style Nanako Shiraishi
2009-01-31 22:00 ` Marius Storm-Olsen
2009-02-01 0:52 ` Nanako Shiraishi
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=861vulqb1o.fsf@broadpark.no \
--to=barvik@broadpark.no \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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).