Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!uunet.UU.NET!sef
From: arnold%audiofax.com@mathcs.emory.edu (Arnold Robbins)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: Re: "long" options for POSIX utilities
Message-ID: <1991May31.032114.1790@uunet.uu.net>
Date: 29 May 91 20:28:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: uunet.1991May31.032114.1790
References: <1991May28.010441.13817@uunet.uu.net> <1991May28.072936.26439@uunet.uu.net>
Sender: usenet@uunet.uu.net (UseNet News)
Reply-To: arnold@audiofax.com
Organization: AudioFAX, Inc., Atlanta Georgia
Lines: 24
Approved: sef@uunet.uu.net (Moderator, Sean Eric Fagan - comp.std.unix)
Originator: sef@uunet.UU.NET
Nntp-Posting-Host: uunet.uu.net
X-Submissions: std-unix@uunet.uu.net

Submitted-by: arnold%audiofax.com@mathcs.emory.edu (Arnold Robbins)

>In article <1991May28.010441.13817@uunet.uu.net> ONM07%DMSWWU1A.BITNET@VM1.gatech.edu (Julian F. Reschke) writes:
>>I recently heard that future POSIX standards will document `long options'
>>similar to those used in the GNU file utilities.

In article <1991May28.072936.26439@uunet.uu.net> randall@Virginia.EDU (Randall Atkinson) writes:
>  The above is the first I've heard of such a thing.  The most
>recently reviewed drafts of POSIX.2 and POSIX.2a, which cover the
>Shell & Utilities area, don't seem to mention any such things.

I can pretty safely say that .2 isn't doing anything like adding gnu-like
long options.  I doubt .2a is either.  The whole thrust of the POSIX effort
is (supposed to be) to standardize existing practice.  So far .1 and .2 have
done OK at it.  E.g., dd retains its current, er, *unusual* command line
syntax. :-)
-- 
Arnold Robbins				 AudioFAX, Inc. | Threads are the
2000 Powers Ferry Road, Suite 200 / Marietta, GA. 30067 | lack of an idea.
INTERNET: arnold@audiofax.com  Phone:   +1 404 618 4281 |     -- Rob Pike
UUCP:	  emory!audfax!arnold  Fax-box: +1 404 618 4581 |


Volume-Number: Volume 23, Number 80