[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#5922) progress bar proposal
----- "Howard Chu" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Gavin Henry wrote:
> > ----- email@example.com wrote:
> >> firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >>> progress seems a bit too generic; the names probably should be
> >> prefixed with
> >>> lutil. Also I suggest using "meter" instead of "progress".
> >>> lutil-meter.h, meter.c.
> >> Currently it's enabled by default. I have a feeling it should be
> >> disabled when
> >> various debug flags are set. Any thoughts? Would there ever be a
> >> situation
> >> where you want debug enabled *and* the progress meter enabled?
> > How would that work? The debug message would stream down your
> > and then the meter would have to consistently return to the start of
> > prompt/window to make any sense? Or would it would it switch to just
> > an elapsed time and the end of the run?
> The messages would all be interleaved; it would be rather ugly.
Thought so. So off when debug is on make perfect sense to me.
OpenLDAP Engineering Team.
Community developed LDAP software.