On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 17:19, Michael Stone <mst...@debian.org> wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 09:06:10AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: >> >> I don't understand your comment in a bug report. Being more >> responsive seems like a good thing to me and good expected behavior. >> Could you say a few words about why you are filing a bug report on >> tail being more responsive? > > I can imagine that if someone is manually reviewing the output, they may > wish to have a certain interval to inspect new data before it is scrolled by > additional data.
That's my case actually, thanks. At the least, tail should warn user that the option they asked for (--sleep-interval) will be ignored. At the most, tail should actually obey the option I asked for, and that's what the bug report is about. -- my place on the web: floss-and-misc.blogspot.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
