Subject: Re: do we really have to "break" 'tar -o' *again*?!?!
To: NetBSD-current Discussion List <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/05/1999 17:43:25
[ On Friday, February 5, 1999 at 10:06:37 (-0500), Bill Sommerfeld wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: do we really have to "break" 'tar -o' *again*?!?!
> Thus, these two features are not, strictly speaking, in conflict, and
> can thus share the same option letter in the interests of maximal
> backwards and standards compatibility.
Indeed, and thats exactly what the effect was in the original, which is
why I suggested reverting the recent change and simply adding some
comments to explain what's going on.
Of course explictly setting "pids=0" is also a form of explicit
documentation though it could cause confusion if used in the wrong order
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <email@example.com> <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org>; Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>