On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 01:27:43PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:27:00 -0800 > David Schultz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I'm concerned about the used character: "-r" is similiar to "-R" > > > > > > Yes, `-r' would be a very poor choice for the reason you state. > > > > Agreed, but the precedent has already been set by touch(1) and > > truncate(1). If we're going to get it wrong some of the time, we > > might as well be consistent about it. > > When we don't look at the fact that neither touch nor truncate operate > recursivly... what about changing touch and truncate to allow the > proposed -c (or -i) too and mark -r as deprecated (if it isn't covered > by a standard)?
I'd really rather that we didn't change this at all, even if it seems "inconsistent". Changing it would just lead to more confusion. I am also against adding new options to chown to copy ownership from existing files. Copy ownership: chown `stat -f%Su file1` file2 Copy group: chgrp `stat -f%Sg file1` file2 Copy both: chown `stat -f%Su:%Sg file1` file2 These could easily be made into shell functions or whatever... Tim To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
