On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 07:33:16PM -0400, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote: > > > On Saturday, August 27, 2005 21:03:37 -0500 Troy Benjegerdes > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Here's a better version. Default behavior is the following: > > > >>fs getcache > >AFS using 22% of cache blocks (4346186 of 20000000 1k blocks) > > 18% of the cache files (91319 of 500000 files) > > Yeah; you're still changing the default output format. > Please don't do that; give people a -verbose switch or whatever, but don't > say "well, if you have a script that parses this, then you need to either > teach it to parse the new format, or have it pass a new switch that old > versions of the tool won't accept". > > As it stands now, there is no way for a program to invoke 'fs getcache' in > a way that is guaranteed to produce the output format it needs without > knowing in advance whether it has your patch or not.
Do you have any scripts that parse the output of 'fs getcacheparms' ? Is there anyone that this is going to cause a big problem for? I see this as a trade-off of changeing the default behavior so it is much more likely we will get usefull information about real-world cache space and file usage. The downside is some scripts break. Would a configure option be a better choice? This we we can enable the new behavior by default, and anyone that really really needs the old behavior can rebuild the 'fs' command. We are prepareing a new release, and a lot more than just 'fs getcache' behavior has changed. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
