On 1/8/02 8:57 AM, "Greg Hudson" <ghudson@MIT.EDU> wrote:
> Now that I'm coming back to this, I'm a little unsure about what the
> right behavior is. If we review how the -q option works in other
> commands, we see two different classes of behaviors:
>
> * "Silence is golden": In some cases, like rsync or scp, the -q
> switch is equivalent to redirecting stdout to /dev/null. The idea
> is to turn a noisy command into something more like a traditional
> Unix utility, which never writes anything to stdout unless that's
> its primary function.
>
> * "Speak softly": In other cases, like cvs, the -q switch reduces
> chatter but leaves some informational messages alone. In the cvs
> case, per-directory messages go away but the file status messages
> stay.
There is a third option I've seen: Count the number of -q's to determine a
'silence' level. You could make -q "speak softly", -q -q quiet except for
errors, and -q -q -q print nothing at all (errors detected by return
status).
Later,
\x/ill :-}
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 1 17:05:01 2002