Subject: Re: deprecating long options in tar and cpio (was: CVS commit: src)
To: Todd Vierling <>
From: Andrew Brown <>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 01/27/1999 02:47:58
On Tue, Jan 26, 1999 at 03:40:32PM -0500, Todd Vierling wrote:
>On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Andrew Brown wrote:
>: >Exactly how does having longopts for compatibility (and the ability to have
>: >more than 52 options) *hurt* you?
>: 52?!  gzip -9!  and so on...
>Tar already uses -[0-9].  As well as almost every letter in the alphabet.  
>So make it `62'.

there's really no reason to be so limiting.

   % less
   Missing filename ("less -\?" for help)

so we could easily use the rest of the isgraph() non-alphanumerics as
options, except for - and : which have other uses to getopt(), some of
which would, of course, have to be escaped from the shell.  which
makes it 92, i believe?  ;-)

|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|             * "ah!  i see you have the internet (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"       * "information is power -- share the wealth."