Blue Swirl wrote: > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:48 AM, john cooper <john.coo...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> I think '?' is not very good name. >> I agree, a shell meta char wasn't my first choice. However >> it follows the precedent of '?' used in similar query operations >> and was chosen only for CLI consistency. > > But '?' is used for other purposes: query available options. It would > be more logical if -readconfig '?' instead could be used to query the > default config files. > Which is what -writeconfig does, sort of. Although the structure of potential multiple input config files is lost and rather the resulting flat config space is output. But the alternative is probably more of a headache than it's worth.
>>> Could we add flags to -readconfig, >>> like -readconfig verbose,nodefaultconfig,file='', to match other >>> options' syntax? >> That seems most natural for options specific to the associated >> config file. However the verbose flag was intended as a >> global action rather than local to a given config file. The >> preexisting "nodefconfig" is also a global option. > > Right. It just seems that there are a lot of global flags. How about > -config nodefaults,verbose? > Agreed this is more logical. The reason I avoided doing so initially was concern over impacting existing usage. But it isn't really much in retrospect. Updated patch follows. -john -- john.coo...@redhat.com