Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 25, 2022. It is now read-only.

enable ssh debug and Error msg debug #264

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 9, 2020

Conversation

tedteng
Copy link
Contributor

@tedteng tedteng commented Aug 20, 2020

What this PR does / why we need it:
enable ssh debug msg
enhance error msg debug msg, make more meaning

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #265

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:

enable ssh debug msg, error msg return lines and function, make more sense.

@tedteng tedteng requested a review from a team as a code owner August 20, 2020 01:01
@gardener-robot-ci-1 gardener-robot-ci-1 added the reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) label Aug 20, 2020
@gardener-robot-ci-2 gardener-robot-ci-2 added needs/ok-to-test Needs approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) and removed reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) labels Aug 20, 2020
@neo-liang-sap
Copy link
Contributor

@tedteng in description Fixes please point to an issue, not PR

@tedteng
Copy link
Contributor Author

tedteng commented Aug 20, 2020

@neo-liang-sap seems you are just close the issue #259.
maybe I will open the new one.

@neo-liang-sap
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
@danielfoehrKn any comments?

@gardener-robot gardener-robot added the reviewed/lgtm Has approval for merging label Aug 20, 2020
pkg/cmd/root.go Outdated
@@ -129,6 +130,7 @@ func init() {

RootCmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(&cachevar, "no-cache", "c", false, "no caching")
RootCmd.PersistentFlags().StringVarP(&outputFormat, "output", "o", "yaml", "output format yaml or json")
RootCmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(&debugSwitch, "debug", "d", false, "enable debug level output")

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
RootCmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(&debugSwitch, "debug", "d", false, "enable debug level output")
RootCmd.PersistentFlags().BoolVarP(&debugSwitch, "debug", "d", false, "enable debug level output")

Could we name it "verbose" as it is not necessarily for debugging?
Just a personal preference though.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mhm I see that there is already a previous commit that introduces the debug flag.
Maybe @DockToFuture has an opinion about the naming of the flag aswell?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@tedteng tedteng Aug 20, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sure, np, that part I just copy from the previous commit for my testing purpose at that time, before that commit merger. Now it changes back.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So you want to have the flag named --debug and not --verbose ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I mean after rebase it change back. I am fine with verbose I can change --debug to --verbose

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done. @danielfoehrKn let me know if there anything else need update.

@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ type AwsInstanceAttribute struct {
MyPublicIP string
}

var sshCmd string

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

could be moved to line 84?

@danielfoehrKn
Copy link

This PR seems to include also changes from this previous commit - could you rebase?

@gardener-robot-ci-2 gardener-robot-ci-2 added reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) and removed reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) labels Aug 20, 2020
@tedteng
Copy link
Contributor Author

tedteng commented Aug 20, 2020

This PR seems to include also changes from this previous commit - could you rebase?

done

@gardener-robot-ci-1 gardener-robot-ci-1 added the reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) label Aug 20, 2020
@gardener-robot-ci-2 gardener-robot-ci-2 removed the reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) label Aug 20, 2020
@gardener-robot-ci-2 gardener-robot-ci-2 added the reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) label Aug 21, 2020
@gardener-robot-ci-1 gardener-robot-ci-1 removed the reviewed/ok-to-test Has approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD) label Aug 21, 2020
@neo-liang-sap neo-liang-sap removed the reviewed/lgtm Has approval for merging label Aug 23, 2020
@neo-liang-sap
Copy link
Contributor

@danielfoehrKn do you still have comments regarding this PR?

@neo-liang-sap
Copy link
Contributor

@danielfoehrKn ping, do you still have comments on this PR?

@neo-liang-sap neo-liang-sap merged commit f4c54d9 into gardener-attic:master Sep 9, 2020
@tedteng tedteng deleted the debug branch September 15, 2020 01:18
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
needs/ok-to-test Needs approval for testing (check PR in detail before setting this label because PR is run on CI/CD)
Projects
None yet
6 participants