Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:22:57 -0400
From:      Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>
To:        Peter Avalos <pavalos@theshell.com>
Cc:        "Tim J. Robbins" <tim@robbins.dropbear.id.au>, freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: df -t option
Message-ID:  <20020422202257.B72727@espresso.q9media.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020423001418.GA896@theshell.com>; from pavalos@theshell.com on Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 05:14:18PM -0700
References:  <20020422175047.A37860@treetop.robbins.dropbear.id.au> <20020423001418.GA896@theshell.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Avalos <pavalos@theshell.com> writes:
> I think it should be implemented as the standard says, and move the
> current -t to some other option (-T seems good).  If it is done this way
> I would not recommend a MFC.  I believe having standard options is the
> way to go.

I agree.  In -stable, -T could become an alias for -t, and using -t
instead of -T could result in a warning noting its deprecated status.
I did something similar when I added the -p option to whois(1).

Best regards,
Mike Barcroft

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-standards" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020422202257.B72727>