Hello, 2014-06-23 19:50 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <[email protected]>: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 07:44:23PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Cathey, Jim <[email protected]> wrote: >> > The entire point of unlink, the reason it even >> > exists, is that it never takes _any_ options. >> > Anything you feed it is a filename, and it >> > will delete it. >> >> coreutils disagree: >> >> $ unlink --version >> unlink (GNU coreutils) 8.17 >> Copyright (C) 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later >> <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>. >> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. >> There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. >> >> Written by Michael Stone. >> >> $ unlink -qwerty >> unlink: invalid option -- 'q' >> Try 'unlink --help' for more information. > > This seems to be a bug in coreutils then. > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/unlink.html > > Under OPTIONS it says "None." For other utilities that take options, > the text reads something like: > > The rm utility shall conform to XBD Utility Syntax Guidelines. > > I think the specification is clear in that the coreutils behavior is > not permitted. > > Rich
Well, unlink takes '--version' and '--help' as options. I think there's a conflict between open standard and coreutils' oddity to bring command syntax and version information with command line switches. If you want to support the '--help' switch (as do busybox, coreutils and a lot of utilities), then you cannot conform to that standard. Cheers, Xabier Oneca_,,_ _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
