summary | shortlog | log | commit | commitdiff | tree
raw | patch | inline | side by side (parent: 21d7744)
raw | patch | inline | side by side (parent: 21d7744)
author | Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> | |
Tue, 21 Nov 2006 03:17:15 +0000 (22:17 -0500) | ||
committer | Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> | |
Tue, 21 Nov 2006 05:22:34 +0000 (00:22 -0500) |
It would be something of a disservice to our users if we refer to
fsck-objects as "verify". So instead we call it fsck-objects in
the console title, and indicate that's how we are verifying the
object database.
We probably should call our menu option "fsck-objects" or similar
but I really do think that "Verify Database" more accurately describes
the action then "fsck-objects" does, especially to users who aren't
file system developers.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
fsck-objects as "verify". So instead we call it fsck-objects in
the console title, and indicate that's how we are verifying the
object database.
We probably should call our menu option "fsck-objects" or similar
but I really do think that "Verify Database" more accurately describes
the action then "fsck-objects" does, especially to users who aren't
file system developers.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
git-gui | patch | blob | history |
index d0176aca7792ee60d12fabedecaf1d6080c5869d..7f75ffeaa0125d4b7982472da65e55feb8d19c4e 100755 (executable)
--- a/git-gui
+++ b/git-gui
}
proc do_repack {} {
- set w [new_console "repack" "Repacking the object database"]
+ set w [new_console {repack} \
+ {Repacking the object database}]
set cmd [list git repack]
lappend cmd -a
lappend cmd -d
}
proc do_fsck_objects {} {
- set w [new_console "verify" "Verifying the object database"]
+ set w [new_console {fsck-objects} \
+ {Verifying the object database with fsck-objects}]
set cmd [list git fsck-objects]
lappend cmd --full
lappend cmd --cache