On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 16:02 -0700, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
[ ... mtree getopts switch code ... ]
Is their any harm in just keeping the -P flag as a no-op and
optionally remove it at some later time (for backward
compatibility)?
That's where I jumped in
"Andrey A. Chernov" wrote:
--- usr.sbin/mtree/mtree.c.orig Thu Jul 27 07:36:02 2000
+++ usr.sbin/mtree/mtree.c Fri Sep 15 04:00:46 2000
[snip]
@@ -115,10 +119,6 @@
case 'q':
qflag = 1;
break;
- case 'P':
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcel Moolenaar writes:
: Is their any harm in just keeping the -P flag as a no-op and optionally
: remove it at some later time (for backward compatibility)?
-P is non-standard, was introduced only in July and therefore we don't
need to keep it around for any
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:02:48 -0700, Marcel Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is their any harm in just keeping the -P flag as a no-op and optionally
remove it at some later time (for backward compatibility)?
We should try to be consistent with POSIX.1-200x as much as possible.
-GAWollman
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 09:44:21PM -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:02:48 -0700, Marcel Moolenaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Is their any harm in just keeping the -P flag as a no-op and optionally
remove it at some later time (for backward compatibility)?
We should try
On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 04:39 +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:
[ ... change mtree(1) physical vs logical traversal ... ]
[ ... mtree.c diff ...]
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@
usage()
{
(void)fprintf(stderr,
-"usage: mtree [-PUcdeinqrux] [-f spec] [-K key] [-k key] [-p path] [-s seed]\n"
Is there any progress in mtree fixing process?
I think there is acceptable solution, in following steps:
1) Return mtree defaults.
2) Add -L
3) Add ${MTREE_FOLLOW_LINKS} to mtree calls (which expands to nothing in
old systems, so we not broke anything in the transition process)
4) Add
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrey A. Chernov" writes:
: Is there any progress in mtree fixing process?
It hasn't been high on my list. I'd be happy to review patches,
however.
: I think there is acceptable solution, in following steps:
:
: 1) Return mtree defaults.
: 2) Add -L
: 3) Add
On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 05:41:46PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Andrey A. Chernov" writes:
: Is there any progress in mtree fixing process?
It hasn't been high on my list. I'd be happy to review patches,
however.
Here it is:
--- usr.sbin/mtree/mtree.c.orig Thu
