On 12/01/10 11:20, Wieman, Karl wrote: > I also think the '-h' description of '--force' does not imply the new > behavior.
The documentation does not say one way or another what "gzip --force" does in this situation. It would be helpful for the documentation to describe what happens here, whatever we decide that to be. > I would have prefferred that the fix to the previous bug was implemented as a > separate flag rather than "enhancing" the already existing '-f' functionality. Adding an extra flag has its own costs, mostly in documentation and user-visible complexity. Hmm, well, it would be helpful to hear other opinions on the matter. In the meantime you have a simple solution that works well with both old and new gzip.
