Andrew Grillet wrote:
> I assumed "usage" is printed in response to a failure to give the correct
> combination of command and argument
> and that -h (or help) would give more detail.
well you assumed wrong --- I don't believe we have a single utility in
the tree which behaves that way. The usa
I assumed "usage" is printed in response to a failure to give the correct
combination of command and argument
and that -h (or help) would give more detail.
I would like the usage (response to incorrect combination) to be the
"synopsis" while the grouped commands and
their valid arguments is supplie
Thanks for the input; I won't persue such verbose usages any longer.
Another attempt was to continue grouping the commands by their arguments:
$ ldomctl -h
usage: ldomctl command [argument ...]
ldomctl delete|select configuration
ldomctl download
Hi Klemens,
Klemens Nanni wrote on Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 01:04:17PM +0200:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:20:10AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>> The problem is when I'm on screens that don't have scroll-back, those 9
>> lines have scrolled other information off the top, and then I've had to
>> repea
As an ldomctl user, I would be happy for usage to be reasonably terse,
provided help gives a fuller description
- provided the usage mentions the help option.
If your screen does not have scroll back, the solution is a screen program
that does. It is not 1978 any more.
(Incidentally, do others ha
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:20:10AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> The problem is when I'm on screens that don't have scroll-back, those 9
> lines have scrolled other information off the top, and then I've had to
> repeat the operations, or if not possible, been more frustrated.
Should we change thos
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:16:59AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I can give a few crazy examples: ld, cc, ksh. I'll say again, there
> surely are cases where it is pointless making usage be complete, because
> the compleness can be harmful. Is this one? Maybe...
Fair point, although these tools
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 11:05:00AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I'm not happy with usage messages which fill half a screen. There has
> to be some threshold where we include very little information, and force
> people to the manual page instead. The many *ctl programs stradle this
> threshold an
Theo de Raadt wrote:
> I can give a few crazy examples: ld, cc, ksh. I'll say again, there
> surely are cases where it is pointless making usage be complete, because
> the compleness can be harmful. Is this one? Maybe...
I've been burned a few times by bgpctl having such a long usage.
# bgpct
Klemens Nanni wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:00:53PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Not sure such a long list is actually useful, but sure.
> I'd argue it is complete and consistent. Both `man -h ldomctl' and
> `ldomctl [-h]' would lack information, so there was no way of getting
> a quick
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:00:53PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Not sure such a long list is actually useful, but sure.
I'd argue it is complete and consistent. Both `man -h ldomctl' and
`ldomctl [-h]' would lack information, so there was no way of getting
a quick overview without reading the ent
Klemens Nanni wrote:
> ldomctl(8) describes much more commands than the poor usage:
>
> $ ldomctl
> usage: ldomctl start|stop|panic domain
> ldomctl status [domain]
>
> Doing as vmctl already does, this diff turns it into
>
> usage: ldomctl command [argument ...
> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 18:35:27 +0200
> From: Klemens Nanni
>
> ldomctl(8) describes much more commands than the poor usage:
>
> $ ldomctl
> usage: ldomctl start|stop|panic domain
> ldomctl status [domain]
>
> Doing as vmctl already does, this diff turns it into
>
>
ldomctl(8) describes much more commands than the poor usage:
$ ldomctl
usage: ldomctl start|stop|panic domain
ldomctl status [domain]
Doing as vmctl already does, this diff turns it into
usage: ldomctl command [argument ...]
ldomctl delete
14 matches
Mail list logo
