H Iam,
On 02/08/2013 01:36 AM, Ian Kumlien wrote:
> This patch includes the functionality of btrfs, it's
> found as "btrfs check" however it makes the binary
> behave differently depending on what it's run as.
[...]
>
> +static int cmd_dummy(int argc, char **argv)
> +{
> + return 0;
I think we should warn that fsck.btrfs does nothing. Something like:
+ fprintf(stderr, "WARNING: fsck.btrfs does nothing. "
"Try 'btrfs check'\n");
> +}
> +
> +/* change behaviour depending on what we're called */
> +const struct cmd_group function_cmd_group = {
> + NULL, NULL,
> + {
> + { "btrfsck", cmd_check, NULL, NULL, 0 },
> + { "fsck.btrfs", cmd_dummy, NULL, NULL, 0 },
> + { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }
> + },
> +};
> +
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
> const struct cmd_struct *cmd;
> + char *called_as = strrchr(argv[0], '/');
> + if (called_as)
> + argv[0] = ++called_as;
>
> crc32c_optimization_init();
>
> - argc--;
> - argv++;
> - handle_options(&argc, &argv);
> - if (argc > 0) {
> - if (!prefixcmp(argv[0], "--"))
> - argv[0] += 2;
> - } else {
> - usage_command_group(&btrfs_cmd_group, 0, 0);
> - exit(1);
> - }
> + /* if we have cmd, we're started as a sub command */
> + if (parse_one_exact_token(argv[0], &function_cmd_group, &cmd) < 0)
> + {
> + argc--;
> + argv++;
>
> - cmd = parse_command_token(argv[0], &btrfs_cmd_group);
> + handle_options(&argc, &argv);
> + if (argc > 0) {
> + if (!prefixcmp(argv[0], "--"))
> + argv[0] += 2;
I can't understand the reason to skip '--' ? But this question is not
related to your patch...
> + } else {
> + usage_command_group(&btrfs_cmd_group, 0, 0);
[...]
--
gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli (kreijackATinwind.it>
Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5
--
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
