iirc we can do -aiv which might be better... i'd have to doublecheck the
manpage, but the -i is also nice for interactive. I would never do a
straight -a or -v without the -i
On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 08:59:07PM +0200, Willow Barraco wrote:
>Signed-off-by: Willow Barraco <contact@willowbarraco.fr>>---> scripts/core/sxmo_upgrade.sh | 2 +-> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)>>diff --git a/scripts/core/sxmo_upgrade.sh b/scripts/core/sxmo_upgrade.sh>index 03be28a..c6cef93 100755>--- a/scripts/core/sxmo_upgrade.sh>+++ b/scripts/core/sxmo_upgrade.sh>@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ update_apk() {> doas apk update>> echo "Upgrading all packages">- doas apk upgrade -v>+ doas apk upgrade -a>> echo "Upgrade complete - reboot for all changes to take effect"> }>-- >2.42.0>
--
sic dicit magister P
https://phartman.sites.luc.edu/
GPG keyID 0xE0DBD3D6 (CAE6 3A6F 755F 7BC3 36CA 330D B3E6 39C6 E0DB D3D6)
> iirc we can do -aiv which might be better... i'd have to doublecheck the > manpage, but the -i is also nice for interactive. I would never do a > straight -a or -v without the -i
Interesting, I never used the interactive mode since it has been dropped
from default. The -v looks a bit useless but I might be wrong about
this. But the -a is mandatory to me.
On Wed Aug 30, 2023 at 10:22 AM CEST, Willow Barraco wrote:
> > iirc we can do -aiv which might be better... i'd have to doublecheck the > > manpage, but the -i is also nice for interactive. I would never do a > > straight -a or -v without the -i>> Interesting, I never used the interactive mode since it has been dropped> from default. The -v looks a bit useless but I might be wrong about> this. But the -a is mandatory to me.
I agree with -aiv, -i asks for confirmation which is probably
safest in case people access this via the menus. I'm not sure what
information -v/--verbose adds but unless it's too much clutter I'd just
keep it as well. And of course -a should indeed be there.
> > > iirc we can do -aiv which might be better... i'd have to doublecheck the > > > manpage, but the -i is also nice for interactive. I would never do a > > > straight -a or -v without the -i> >> > Interesting, I never used the interactive mode since it has been dropped> > from default. The -v looks a bit useless but I might be wrong about> > this. But the -a is mandatory to me.>> I agree with -aiv, -i asks for confirmation which is probably> safest in case people access this via the menus. I'm not sure what> information -v/--verbose adds but unless it's too much clutter I'd just> keep it as well. And of course -a should indeed be there.
Agreed, this is a good default. Sent a v2, marked this as superseded!
Thanks!