From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.fusionio.com ([66.114.96.31]:53367 "EHLO mx2.fusionio.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761923Ab2KAPHQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:07:16 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:07:10 -0400 From: Chris Mason To: Jan Schmidt CC: Chris Mason , "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" , "ablock84@googlemail.com" , "sensille@gmx.net" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Btrfs-progs: urgent fixes for btrfs send Message-ID: <20121101150710.GA21281@shiny> References: <1351782086-23435-1-git-send-email-list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: <1351782086-23435-1-git-send-email-list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:01:24AM -0600, Jan Schmidt wrote: > Hi everybody, > > We made a bad mistake with "btrfs send" command line arguments and we'd > better fix it before it's being widely used (read: *now*). Ok, I do agree that -i was confusing. I didn't end up using it in my backup scripts here. How about: Make -p and -i mean the same thing. Add -r for what -i should have done. This has the advantage of not breaking the people that did get working btrfs send setups ;) -chris