[bug #22231] 'split' feature request: an option to uses e.g. '.001' as first suffix

[Sci_Fi]

URL:
  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?22231>

                 Summary: 'split' feature request: an option to uses e.g.
'.001' as first suffix
                 Project: GNU Core Utilities
            Submitted by: sci_fi
            Submitted on: Tuesday 02/05/2008 at 07:51
                Category: None
                Severity: 3 - Normal
              Item Group: None
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any

    _______________________________________________________

Details:


To create UseNet binary postings to match those made by others as close as
possible, we need to create split files with 3-digit numeric suffixes.

The problem comes when 'split --numeric-suffixes --suffix-length=3' starts
naming the files with .000 as the first suffix.  This causes great confusion
among much of the UseNet userbase esp. those running M$ systems.  It seems the
.000 file is reserved as some kind of index for their apps, and 'split's .000
file is rejected as "unknown format".

I know... I know... UNIX was here well-before Mr Gates & company, but trying
to explain to those users what to do (simply 'cat' or 'copy /b' all of the
files in numeric order) is a chore.  We who use *ix-based systems (mine's OSX)
do not furnish DOS .bat files for those users.  Yes I've received some public
flack about this; I have no idea if those users ever were able to reconstruct
the original files.

I'd like to suggest an option be added to 'split' that would let us begin
naming the files with a suffix e.g. .001 or settable by a command-line option.
 I don't know what would be a good name for this option (and whether it'd
follow POSIX standards etc.).

I'm hoping by the absence of a .000 file in our UseNet posts, where the .001
file is really "the beginning", this would cause the M$-based tools to follow
suit.

As an aside, most of us normally post several .par2 files, and we construct
them in such a way that simply running a par2 utility will recreate the
_original_ file automatically.  So, at least for my posts, that's what I'm
telling users to do: just run your favorite par2 util, you don't need to 'copy
/b' beforehand.  But it'd be best if we could cause 'split' to begin with the
.001 file as explained above.

Thank you for letting me discuss this here.





    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?22231>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/