On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 7:52 PM, David Mason <dma...@ryerson.ca> wrote:
> On 5 October 2014 12:41, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > Another option comes to mind which would, i think, provide a one-call > > solution and might avoid major surgery: the ability to squelch output at > the > > app level, such that fossil_print() and friends become no-ops when called > > when the squelch flag is set. > > Unless I'm missing something, this is to make a true -q option, right? > I thought of this, but wasn't certain that all output was via > fossil_print and fossil_fatal. Also for my case, redirecting output > to /dev/null is perfectly reasonable. > Correct, this would be a true -q option, usable also by other routines for which "quiet mode" would be useful. fossil_print/fatal() would be the main ones, and if any other output filtered into your mailbox along the way, we could track those down as needed. > Continuing to think about it, my issue is that I don't want to send > empty emails, an a look at mail(1) suggests that: > > fossil update -m | mail -E -s "some subject" m...@he.re Ah, right, which isn't exactly the same as -q. Hmm. So how about that? Andy? > > Thanks for the discussion... I think I've finally come to the cleanest > solution. Sometimes we (I) need to forget about our possible > solutions and remember what the real requirement is. > Which we often don't know until we deploy the first draft ;). -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
