Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:40:34 -0400 From: Steven Kreuzer <skreuzer@exit2shell.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Bert JW Regeer <xistence@0x58.com>, Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: OpenBSD sdiff Question Message-ID: <20080317154034.GA78551@scruffy.exit2shell.com> In-Reply-To: <20080316062919.GB88526@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <20080314231404.GB99765@scruffy.exit2shell.com> <20080315135916.GH68662@dracon.ht-systems.ru> <432044E0-812E-4C13-A62D-EEA7170DADB9@0x58.com> <20080316062919.GB88526@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:29:19PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 03:21:01PM -0700, Bert JW Regeer wrote: > > Even if BSD has no tradition to keep a separate program version, it is > > still very handy to be able to give this data to other developers if > > something is failing. > > $ ident failing-binary is the output that means something. A version > string will not. > > > > Programs that don't have a -v or --version switch are frustrating to > > Anyone used to working on BSD will not expect a -v switch. It isn't part > of BSD tradition. The simple fact there is no obivous "version" to print > just shows that in a OS that is developed and built as a whole, having a > version on the util is meaningless. > > > Dropping -v would be a bad thing, and make the tools not compatible, > > thus breaking many scripts that do expect a -v. > > Come on, how many scripts do you write that do "sdiff -v" today? I have to agree with this. I will submit the port without -v/--version and worse comes to worse, add it in later if enough people complain. -- Steven Kreuzer http://www.exit2shell.com/~skreuzer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080317154034.GA78551>