[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: humanize_number(3) for dd(1) summary?
On Sat, 04 Dec 2010 04:04:10 +0100
Jean-Yves Migeon <jeanyves.migeon%free.fr@localhost> wrote:
> On 04.12.2010 03:34, der Mouse wrote:
> >> I can mimic what ls(1), df(1), du(1), ... do and add a "-h" flag to
> >> have a "human readable" summary.
> > I think adding "-"-prefixed flags to dd would be very very wrong.
> I agree.
> > If you really want to make this controllable but don't like conv=, I'd
> > add something like a flag= argument which works like conv= but controls
> > non-conversion behaviour.
> > But I'm not sure conv= is wrong. It has noerror and notrunc already,
> > which while related to data copying are not quite conversions in the
> > usual sense....
> I can't really find prior art; the only notable exception being GNU
> dd(1) .
> conv=human looks convenient, but it looks a bit too generic to me. And
> adding just a flag= or display= argument for that is IMHO overkill.
The only problem I see is that scripts won't need human output (and
don't expect it), but that humans have to type a number of extra
characters to obtain that behaviour, and they're the ones typing
commands in manually. At least -h would be short to add.
But would it make sense if dd detected interactive use (i.e. using
isatty on stderr) and enabled the human display format by default then?
Main Index |
Thread Index |