[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 0/1] New option for runtest to log_user to stdout
|
From: |
Filipe Brandenburger |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 0/1] New option for runtest to log_user to stdout |
|
Date: |
Thu, 14 May 2015 22:11:54 -0700 |
Hi Ben,
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Ben Elliston <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 03:04:09PM -0700, Filipe Brandenburger wrote:
>> So, I'm proposing adding a new option (--log_user is my suggestion,
>> but feel free to pick something else) to allow enabling "log_user"
>> expect output to stdout without the need to increase verbosity.
>
> I don't have a problem with the patch in priciple. I can see it would
> be useful, and it's optional. However, calling the option 'log_user'
> exposes details of Expect. I would rather not do that. Can you
> rename the option to perhaps --log_dialog? Better to keep the
> underscore for consistency with older, existing two-word options (eg,
> --tool_opts).
Sure, that makes sense and --log_dialog looks more appropriate.
> Can you please update the patch and send it again?
Will do shortly.
Cheers,
Filipe