Re: [Bug-ddrescue] Suggestions to rename "logfile"

[Florian Sedivy]

I nearly forgot the killer argument:
The only option in ddrescue that has "logfile" in it's name, --domain-logfile, 
already uses -m (like map) as short form! I always wondered what -m meant, but 
it seems Antonio had a premonition ...

Greetings, Florian

> Am 17.07.2015 um 17:46 schrieb Florian Sedivy <address@hidden>:
> 
> Hello Antonio!
> 
> I know I am quite late to the party, as there already is a release candidate 
> with "blockfile", but would still like to give my input. 
> 
> My proposition is "mapfile" to replace "logfile" 
> Alternatively "blockmap"
> 
> You responded to this before:
>>> Robert Trevellyan wrote:
>>>> mapfile
>>>> rescuemap
>> Antonio Diaz Diaz answered:
>> The problem with these is that 'map' is only mentioned in the ddrescue 
>> documentation in relation with the '--test-mode', while 'block' is mentioned 
>> in about all places related to the logfile.
> 
> But that is exactly the reason why I would not use "blockfile". Everything in 
> ddrescue is about blocks. It reads from block-devices in portions of 
> soft-blocks and hard-blocks, it uses blocks as unit, and so on. Just about 
> every input or output file in ddrescue could be coined as a "blockfile". No 
> wonder "block" appears all over the documentation. If you are looking to 
> replace the word "log", the better choice is a new word, one not already 
> present in so many other contexts. 
> 
> What is the logfile? It is a map of blocks. (You even phrased it yourself 
> that way in the --test-mode description.) It is not a list of blocks, because 
> it does not list single blocks or some blocks. A "loose" logfile might be 
> considered a list of block-ranges, but a well defined logfile "lists" all 
> blocks and defines a status (think "color") for them, thereby painting a map 
> of blocks. The defining part here is "map", while "blocks" is redundant in 
> the world of ddrescue - what else? Therefore I'd slightly prefer "mapfile" to 
> "blockmap". 
> 
> 
> On the topic of making the logfile (or blockfile/mapfile/blockmap) mandatory
>> Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote:
>> As I read somewhere, "build a system that even a fool can use, and only a 
>> fool will want to use it".
> 
> 
> I am absolutely with you on not creating it automatically. I thought about 
> this for some time and found too many pitfalls. 
> 
> But I am with Adrien and Felix for making it mandatory. This is the one most 
> common error, and it is easy to prevent. 
> I propose to allow a single "-" as 3rd parameter to operate without a 
> logfile. That way the experienced user has only minimal inconvenience when 
> making logless runs. 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Florian
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-ddrescue mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-ddrescue