From owner-freebsd-bugs Fri Feb 22 6:15:52 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Received: from axl.seasidesoftware.co.za (axl.seasidesoftware.co.za [196.31.7.201]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FD737B402 for ; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 06:15:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.seasidesoftware.co.za) by axl.seasidesoftware.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16eGXE-000E99-00; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:18:52 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Tim Robbins Cc: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/35201: link and unlink are not SUSv2-compliant as the manpage states In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 22 Feb 2002 06:10:01 PST." <200202221410.g1MEA1A91852@freefall.freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 16:18:52 +0200 Message-ID: <54382.1014387532@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> Sender: owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 22 Feb 2002 06:10:01 PST, Tim Robbins wrote: > I've adjusted the patches to rm and ln to use getopt instead of doing it > themselves. I was hesitant in doing that at first because it breaks > "unlink -foo", but P1003.2-1992 says: > "Applications calling any utility with a first operand starting with "-" > should usually specify "--", as indicated by Guideline 10, to mark the > end of the options. This is true even if the Synopsis in this standard > does not specify any options; implementations may provide options as > extensions to this standard." > ... and I'm not sure anyone really uses link/unlink, anyway. Argh! The whole point of these alternatives to ln/rm is that they have a simple, optionless interface. :-( Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message