"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