bug-bash
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why two separate option namespaces?


From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: Why two separate option namespaces?
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:18:46 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1

On 2/27/17 11:50 AM, Martijn Dekker wrote:

> So basically you're saying that, for options without a single-letter
> equivalent, "-o" options are those that are either POSIX or that you
> think should be POSIX? But then that distinction is more political than
> technical, isn't it?

Heh. Let's just say that I'm leaving the `set -o' namespace to Posix.

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    address@hidden    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]