On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 02:03:59PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-10-29 13:33, David Marchand:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 
> > 6wind.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > +for p in "$@" ; do
> > > +       printf -- "\n### $p\n\n"
> > > +       report=$($DPDK_CHECKPATCH_PATH $options "$p" 2>/dev/null)
> > > +       [ $? -ne 0 ] || continue
> > > +       printf '%s\n' "$report" | head -n -6
> > > +       status=$(($status + 1))
> > > +done
> > > +exit $status
> > >
> > 
> > I prefer when checking scripts only complain when something is wrong :-)
> > So I would only display the file name if checkpatch complains.
> 
> Yes I'll move the first printf after the "continue".

Ok, but perhaps instead we can get a print at the end of how many files were
checked. I'm concerned about the case where we think we have checked something 
and
it's ok, when in fact we have actually had an error in our command and e.g. not 
checked
any files at all. The printing of the filename helps give a guarantee that the
script is doing the right thing, so if it goes away, I'd hope for some other 
method
to ensure that.

/Bruce

Reply via email to