Eric Blake wrote: > According to Pádraig Brady on 12/22/2008 2:54 AM: >>> + -f, --force do not prompt before overwriting (The -f >>> option\n\ >>> + overrides any previous -i or -n >>> options.)\n\ >>> + -i, --interactive prompt before overwrite (The -i option\n\ >>> + overrides any previous -f or -n >>> options.)\n\ >>> + -n, --no-replace do not overwrite an existing file (The >>> -n\n\ >>> + option overrides any previous -f or -i\n\ >>> + options.)\n\ >> This is actually now quite confusing/inaccurate. I think these 3 options >> should be mutually exclusive. I.E. if more than 1 specified an >> error should be printed. > > POSIX requires support for simultaneous -f and -i, in either order, so we > can't error out there. But since -n is an addition, we can error out > depending on -f or -i, if that makes more sense than overriding. > > Again, since we are modeling after the fact that FreeBSD provides it, what > is the behavior on that platform when you mix-n-match -fin? >
Well I wouldn't treat -n differently if one must be able to specify both -f and -i. But does POSIX really specify that? I can't see it from a quick read. All I can see are a mention of the -HLP options: "Specifying more than one of the mutually-exclusive options -H, -L, and -P shall not be considered an error. The last option specified shall determine the behavior of the utility." cheers, Pádraig. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
