"i have no existing users for this so my opinion is worthless, but..."

breaking any existing users for consistency doesn't sound worth the
trouble? YAGNI.

On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 8:06 AM, Rob Landley <r...@landley.net> wrote:
> I haven't implemented fuser because the way it works is kinda stupid. And
> inconsistent with how things like "grep" work.
>
> I'm pondering doing an fuser that works like grep, as in all the output goes 
> to
> stdout when there isn't an error, but if you give it one file it doesn't 
> prefix
> it with filename: and if you give it multiple files it does by default but
> there's an option to switch it off.
>
> BUT: that's not how the existing fuser works. The _lack_ of a command isn't
> explicitly nonconformant, this would be. But what this would be is 
> _consistent_,
> working the same way other commands work.
>
> Unsure whether or not I should do that. Any opinions? (If you have a script
> doing "fuser onefile 2>/dev/null" both would work the same way, but if your
> script is doing "fuser file file file" it wouldn't. You'd have to add.. what's
> the grep option... -h. You'd have to change your script to say "fuser -h one 
> two
> three".)
>
> I suppose what I could do is have a --posix and then you can alias fuser 
> "fuser
> --posix" in your /etc/profile and then if you really need the old behavior...?
>
> (This isn't like cut -DF because you have to explicitly add those flags to get
> the different behavior. That extends the spec rather than violating it.)
>
> Rob
> _______________________________________________
> Toybox mailing list
> Toybox@lists.landley.net
> http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
_______________________________________________
Toybox mailing list
Toybox@lists.landley.net
http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net

Reply via email to