On la, 2011-01-22 at 10:33 -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > So, I'm inclined to just promote the use of chronic, and leave mr -q > as a way to omit mr's own output, while leaving the output of the > commands it runs unaffected.
chronic isn't really helping me. I have a long list of things for mr, and if there's a failure with any of them, I need to read through the whole output, which is tedious. Instead of having intricate ways for mr to pass --quiet options to each version control system, mr could do what chronic does: capture output and not display it unless there was an error. Would that be an acceptable way of implementing things? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
