linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: Do not to be quiet if verbose option used.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <DE86FFC8-0D93-46CC-B465-F8603921AD62@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 5 May 2019 01:04:00 +0300
From:   Alexey Lyashkov <alexey.lyashkov@...il.com>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Artem Blagodarenko <artem.blagodarenko@...il.com>,
        linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexey Lyashkov <c17817@...y.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e2fsck: Do not to be quiet if verbose option used.


> 5 мая 2019 г., в 0:49, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> написал(а):
> 
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 07:16:36AM +0300, Alexey Lyashkov wrote:
>> Theodore,
>> 
>> Usecase is simple. User use a -p with -v flag,
>> in this case, -p block any messages on console in case it successfully fixed.
>> It’s OK _without_ -v flag, situation is different with -v flag.
>> In this case, user expect to see mode debug info about check/fix process,
>> and «no messages» in this mode confuse a user, as he think «no messages» == «no bugs fixed»,
>> but it’s not a true in common way.
>> From other side, -p print a messages about fix process, but not for bitmaps, it’s source of additional
>> confuse for the user, as he lack an info about FS changes during e2fsck run.
> 
> That's not a use case.   *Why* is the user using -p?
> 
> The -p option is only intended to be used when called from boot
> scripts, where e2fsck is run in parallel
It’s not a true. -p option is good enough in run to run automatic fixes, for minor bugs, without relation to boot scripts.
-y option too soft, -n option - too strict, -p is good enough in common case for initial fix.
But anyway, is it run from boot scripts command output is logged and can be analyzed by automatic tools,
if it run by hand it will analyzed by user. 
It’s very strange to have some output is in console, some output is omitted.
A specially in case user request a -v option.



---
Alex