[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h]
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h] |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:48:02 +0000 |
> >
> > Just because two extreme cases support -h as a alias for --help,
> > doesn't mean that it is a GNU convention. You still haven't given a
> > good reason why -h should be a alias for --help.
>
> It is a common getopt option to trigger command line help, the most
> common I suggest. --help is the most common getoptlong option in GNU.
> Perhaps there is a GNU standard which covers this aspect of programs
> user-friendly-ness.
The GNU coding standards ONLY require --help, and not -h, because of
the fact that -h is ambiguous and some commands already have it
standardized to mean something other than help. If you want help
from a GNU program, --help is the only spelling that is guaranteed
to work.
> We'll all have to remember to use --help long option if -h is not going
> to be consistent then. We can agree to differ on that if you cannot
> agree with my proposal.
You are correct - coreutils is not going to add -h where it does not
already exist, because --help already exists.
--
Eric Blake
- [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], J. Grant, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], J. Grant, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], J. Grant, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], J. Grant, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/09/17
- Re: [Fwd: cat: invalid option -- h], Andreas Schwab, 2005/09/17