On Saturday, 07 January, 2012 16:14:43 you wrote: > On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 08:32:51PM +0600, Roman Mamedov wrote: > > On Sat, 7 Jan 2012 16:25:29 +0200 > > > > Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > IMHO it would be much better if we had our long names and a handful of > > > predefined abbreviations (like ip command for example). > > > > Does the ip command use just a handful of predefined abbrebiations? > > > > ip addr show > > ip add sho > > ip ad sh > > ip a s > > > > all work. > > which suggests to me they use exactly the same scheme as btrfs currently. > > Look at ntbl for ntable, tunl for tunnel, tap for tuntap, lst for list, > etc. On top af that they are using a "first match" policy, which leads > to a very simple and clean code and is not at all what btrfs uses: > > ip route > ip rout > ip rou > ip ro > ip r > > all work and expand to "ip route" > > and if you want the "rule" sub-command, you have to use > > ip ru > > at the very least. > > btrfs instead tries to be clever, and if ip was doing the same thing > btrfs does you would get "ambiguous command 'r'" error in response to > "ip r". You are right, but this is a bug. 1) btrfs s sn -> means btrfs subvolume snapshot 2) btrfs s se -> means btrfs subvolume set-default 3) btrfs s s -> is ambiguous command because it could means both 1) and 2) However if we try 1) we get an error. But this is not the intended behavior. I have to investigate why. BR G.Baroncelli > > Thanks, > > Ilya -- gpg key@ keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (ghigo) <kreijack@xxxxxxxxx> Key fingerprint = 4769 7E51 5293 D36C 814E C054 BF04 F161 3DC5 0512 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
