Refactor mysqlctld flags to follow standardized naming

[mounicasruthi]

Description

This PR is a part of an ongoing change to support the transition from underscores (_) to dashes (-) in flag naming conventions. This PR refactors some flags specific to mysqlctld binary.

Flags Updated in This PR:

--init-db-sql-file
--socket-file
--wait-time

Flag Count Before vs After:

	Flags with _	Flags with -
Before	148	1932
After	143	1937

# of migrated flags: 5

Related Issue(s)

#17880

Checklist

• "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
• If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
• Tests were added or are not required
• Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
• Documentation was added or is not required

[vitess-bot]

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

• Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
• Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

• Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

• Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
• New features should be documented.
• There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
• There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

• Is this flag really necessary?
• Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

• Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
• If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

• Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
• Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
• RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
• If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
• vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 6.66667% with 14 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 67.49%. Comparing base (b079554) to head (194023c).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
go/vt/mysqlctl/mysqld.go	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/mysqlctl/command/init.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/mysqlctld/cli/mysqlctld.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/vtbackup/cli/vtbackup.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/mysqlctl/command/shutdown.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/mysqlctl/command/start.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/mysqlctl/command/teardown.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
go/cmd/vtctl/vtctl.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/servenv/unix_socket.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #18432   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   67.49%   67.49%           
=======================================
  Files        1607     1607           
  Lines      263518   263518           
=======================================
+ Hits       177849   177850    +1     
+ Misses      85669    85668    -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[dbussink]

Is the reason we can't change this yet because we run this same code for upgrade / downgrade tests from this version? Or do we then run the code from the older version for this test setup too?

[nickvanw]

This is a pretty common pattern in the code, I haven't looked at these particular tests. Quite a few in #18280 as well, etc.

I want to check and see if we can bump these or have some sort of logic, it's a smell that we have all of these TODOs imo.

It might be worth doing in a follow-up PR, so that we can get these merged before release?