bug-coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods


From: Pádraig Brady
Subject: bug#14976: [patch] use semicolons in option descriptions, not periods
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2013 11:54:42 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2

On 08/04/2013 10:12 AM, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> 
> Hello Pádraig,
> 
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013, at 18:08, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>  -  -d, --directory            list directory entries instead of contents,
>>  -                               and do not dereference symbolic links
>>  +  -d, --directory            list just names of directories, not their 
>> contents
>>
>> So I was wondering why that clarification was added.
>> I guess that it's obvious from the output for -l and -F
>> that the symlink is being operated on: [...]
>> whereas with -d it's not: [...]
> 
> Okay, I see.  Although I still think it's an unneeded detail in a
> help text, the addition of "by default" makes it better.
> 
>> Also I don't like the "just names" in the new description as
>> it might imply that it overrides -l or something.
> 
> Well, the phrase was taken from the info documentation, where it says:
> "List just the names of directories, [...] rather than listing their 
> contents."  :)  But I see your point.
> 
> The thing is, I have to read the phrase three times before I realize
> that "directory entries" does not mean "entries OF directories" but
> "entries that ARE directories".  The problematic word is "entries",
> which makes me think of "items in a container", whereas in fact it
> refers to "items on the command line", which requires some stretch
> of the imagination.
> 
> So I propose the following change:
> 
> -  -d, --directory            list directory entries instead of contents,
> +  -d, --directory            list directories themselves, not their contents,

better thanks.

> (Oh, by the way, when you modify a patch, please make a note of this
> in the log message -- I don't like to see changes that I would never
> have made booked without further ado under my name.)
> 
> For the tail --follow thingy I have the following suggestion:
> 
> -                             -f and --follow[=descriptor] are equivalent\n\
> +                             an absent option argument means 'descriptor'\n\

Fair enough. My thinking was for patches like these I'd like to minimize the 
number
of commits, whilst in this case I assumed the change wouldn't be controversial.
I'll merge this adjustment into to current patch if that's OK with you?

thanks,
Pádraig.






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]