[PATCH] btrfs-progs: usage should match what is coded

2013-03-01 Thread Anand Jain
Signed-off-by: Anand Jain --- cmds-restore.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/cmds-restore.c b/cmds-restore.c index 9385042..4a14f93 100644 --- a/cmds-restore.c +++ b/cmds-restore.c @@ -763,10 +763,6 @@ const char * const cmd_restore_usage[] = { "-f filesystem l

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: usage should match what is coded

2013-03-01 Thread Eric Sandeen
On 3/1/13 4:10 AM, Anand Jain wrote: > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain Revieed-by: Eric Sandeen But the curious side of me wonders how it got this way. commit e43cc461550130494194201037590a2b1f0f6880 Author: Ian Kumlien Date: Fri Feb 8 01:37:02 2013 +0100 Btrfs-progs: add restore command to

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: usage should match what is coded

2013-03-01 Thread Hugo Mills
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 11:47:50AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 3/1/13 4:10 AM, Anand Jain wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain > > Revieed-by: Eric Sandeen > > But the curious side of me wonders how it got this way. > > commit e43cc461550130494194201037590a2b1f0f6880 > Author: Ian Kumlien

Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: usage should match what is coded

2013-03-03 Thread David Sterba
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 06:05:21PM +, Hugo Mills wrote: > On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 11:47:50AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > On 3/1/13 4:10 AM, Anand Jain wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain > > > > Revieed-by: Eric Sandeen > > > > But the curious side of me wonders how it got this way. >