From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 603FE62C28 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:15:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5656923350 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:15:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id E091423343 for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:15:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AAB304552B for ; Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:15:18 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:15:16 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:85.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/85.0 Content-Language: en-GB To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Aaron Lauterer References: <20201221151351.30575-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> <20201221151351.30575-2-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20201221151351.30575-2-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.582 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -3.299 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH manager 2/3] pvereport: rework report contents X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:15:19 -0000 On 21/12/2020 16:13, Aaron Lauterer wrote: > @@ -76,7 +77,9 @@ my $init_report_cmds = sub { > > if (-e '/etc/ceph/ceph.conf') { > # TODO: add (now working) rdb ls over all pools? really needed? > - push @{$report_def->{volumes}}, 'ceph status', 'ceph osd status', 'ceph df', 'pveceph status', 'pveceph pool ls'; > + push @{$report_def->{volumes}}, 'pveceph status', 'ceph osd status', > + 'ceph df', 'ceph osd df tree', 'cat /etc/ceph/ceph.conf', > + 'ceph config dump', 'pveceph pool ls', 'ceph versions'; > } Oh, and I followed up on this one. I know, it's tempting to do "partial splits" once a line is to long, but it's better to consequently move all atoms to different lines once that is needed in general. E.g.: push @{$report_def->{volumes}}, 'pveceph status', 'ceph osd status', 'ceph df', '...', 'ceph versions', ; One could "cheat" by use multiple push operations, each adding a few commands, but it's not that many lines here, so... Oh, and actually, I'm not 100% sure about the push and @array being in the same line, I treated this now as single atom as it's a perl built-in and always "push on X" with the elements as argument. If it was a "normal" sub, the first argument would need to go on it's line too. In short, mirror that what rustfmt would do for similar rust code not breaking any of our specific style rules (like indentation). mostly just noting as we had a few style exchanges/discussion in the last days already ^^