From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 6 09:50:10 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B861065673 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2009 09:50:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [IPv6:2001:4070:101:2::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431898FC1C for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2009 09:50:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n569nqNa090560; Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:49:52 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost) by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) with ESMTP id n569nqwu090557; Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:49:52 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:49:51 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar To: Ruben de Groot In-Reply-To: <20090606094648.GA10672@ei.bzerk.org> Message-ID: References: <200906050924.23167.kirk@strauser.com> <200906051208.43135.kirk@strauser.com> <4A29EBB7.9090100@strauser.com> <20090606094648.GA10672@ei.bzerk.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, utisoft@gmail.com Subject: Re: Date representation as YY/DDD or YYYY/DDD X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:50:11 -0000 >> what some single-letter option meant. I pretty much never use them on >> the command line, though. > > Agreed, the long options *as an alternative* can be descriptive in scripts, > tutorials, howto's etc. > The other reason often mentioned, there being not enough letters in the > alphabet to cover all possible options, in my opinion advocates bloated > software (one program can do it all), which goes against the Unix paradigm > of making small programs that do one task exceptionally well and just > chaining these together. you exaggerate a bit. for example rsync does have >26 options but most make sense for program that is dedicated to one task, and it isn't against Unix paradigm. But it have one letter shortcuts for mostly used parameters