Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:36:14 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: obrien@freebsd.org, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, jonathan+freebsd-hackers@hst.org.za Subject: Re: find -lname and -ilname implemented Message-ID: <20080227193614.GA50391@kobe.laptop> In-Reply-To: <20080227183113.GA54600@dragon.NUXI.org> References: <200802232322.45288.jonathan%2Bfreebsd-hackers@hst.org.za> <20080223.164806.-674897155.imp@bsdimp.com> <20080225203341.GA4150@kobe.laptop> <20080227183113.GA54600@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2008-02-27 10:31, David O'Brien <obrien@freebsd.org> wrote: >On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:33:41PM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: >>On 2008-02-23 16:48, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote: >>> This knee-jerk reaction against gnu find functionality baffles me. >>> The changes are trivial and make FreeBSD more compatible. It is such >>> an obvious no-brainer that I frankly didn't expect anybody to bat an >>> eye. >> >> So should I expect similar knee-jerk reactions to the just committed >> `finger compatibility' option to implement du -l for hardlinks? > > You added a new useful feature - and you based the option letter on > prior-art (and resumable doen't conflict with POSIX). Fortunately, no, there is no conflict :-) The du(1) manpage at the online version of SUSv3 <http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/utilities/du.html>; mentions only the -L option, for dereferencing symlinks. I should have probably mentioned this in the commit log, now that I think about it.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080227193614.GA50391>