On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 07:51:14PM -0600, Jeremy C. Reed wrote: > On Sat, 5 Mar 2011, Jason McIntyre wrote: > > > > > fixed, thanks. but i'm confused - if originally -g requested group info > > > > "be included", why did the man page say (of group info) "though not for > > > > -g"? should that passage read "excluded" instead? anyone know? > > > > > > Sorry -- after checking the commit logs it apparently got introduced > > > right after -g was made POSIX-compliant (r1.49). It's neither correct > > > for traditional BSD nor POSIX behaviour. > > > > > > > so, can anyone clarify what -g orignally did, and whether the wording is > > ok? > > > Original? > > For 32V and 3BSD (1979/80): ``Give group ID instead of owner ID in long > listing.'' > > For 4.1cBSD / 4.2BSD (1982/83), it changed to ``Include the group > ownership of the file in a long output.'' (So display user and group.) > > Then displaying group (with user) also became the default in 4.4BSD and > -g then was ignored for compatibility (in March 1993). > > OpenBSD 4.2 (May 2007) changed it so -g would not show the owner -- so > back to 3BSD -g behaviour which matches POSIX.
thanks. then i think the "though not for -g" text was wrong for a very long time. anyway, it's fixed now. jmc
