On 08/22/2012 06:38 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/22/2012 10:05 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 08/22/2012 03:00 PM, Ondrej Oprala wrote:
Hi, I haven't heard from this thread since I posted the last patch,
are there still things to correct or should I consider it closed?
The --tag description in the texinfo is a bit sparse. It says:
"If the file is not binary, put a leading whitespace before the
algorithm's name."
More accurately it could say:
"When operating in @option{--text} mode, put a leading space before
the algorithm's name.
On @option{--text} mode significant systems, this enables
compatibility with existing
BSD (binary) checksums, while also allowing operating in @option{--text} mode".
It's worth considering though, do we want to support --text mode
at all with --tag? I.E. we could avoid the default leading space,
and have --tag imply --binary and be mutually exclusive with --text?
I'm fine with --tag implying --binary. --text mode is almost always the
wrong thing to use, and it should have never been the default on
text-mode systems, nor should it be the default output (we're stuck with
that for normal output, where the presence of '*' to indicate binary
output, but only from systems where text mode differs, causes no end of
grief; but for BSD output we don't have to repeat the mistake).
I'm 60:40 for having --tag imply --binary given the above.
I'm 90:10 for having --tag imply --binary.
I agree wholeheartedly. Simpler is better.
Ok, I'm almost done with the changes, I just have one question.
What should the sum utils do if they get --tag --text as arguments?
Would it be possible to add BOOL TEXT and end with an error
if(text && prefix_tag) ?
