Re: df: --inodes versus --portability mode

[Bernhard Voelker]

On 09/20/2012 03:08 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 09/18/2012 11:54 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> So as -P does nothing, shouldn't df print a warning that
>> it disregards it when -i is in effect?
> 
> Well as it used to do something (ensure single lines)
> so I was going to suggest not printing a warning,
> for a while at least.  Though I now notice that BSD also
> implements -i, and that adds the inodes columns _in addition_
> to the blocks columns. So it's more likely that users
> may be confused about this combination, so I guess a warning
> is warranted. Note we couldn't change to the BSD -i behavior
> for backward compat reasons.

So the BSDs did it actually better for the -i ... maybe we
can lap them with --output again ;-)

>> I thought that I could get rid of the mashing up of the scale
>> factor (human_output_opts, output_block_size) and df's main
>> modes DEFAULT_MODE, INODES_MODE, POSIX_MODE and HUMAN_MODE)
>> somehow ... because the same question will arise again with
>> 'df -P --out=...' ;-/
>> IMHO the cleanest solution would be to make the main modes
>> -i, -p and the new --o mutually exclusive.
> 
> Yes --o should be mutually exclusive with the -i and -P options.

Thanks.
Ok, we'll see how it all fits together. I was planning to have
--o without any parameters to print all available fields (which
is already working here, just the parsing for --o=<fields> is
missing).

Have a nice day,
Berny