bug#20354: [feature request] ln with command line arguments in reverse order

[Erik Auerswald]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 03:07:50PM +0200, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 04/17/2015 02:45 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> >   ln [OPTIONS] EXISTING NEW
> 
> I stilll think this is a translation issue.
> And I don't think the synopsis has to look the same as for
> cp and mv.  If you really want it to be changed, What about
> 
>   ln [OPTIONS] LINK_TARGET LINK_NAME
> 
> ?

IMHO changing TARGET to LINK_TARGET does not help.

Why should the synopsis for similar commands look differently?

cp -l SOURCE DEST
ln TARGET LINK_NAME

cp -s SOURCE DEST
ln -s TARGET LINK_NAME

Perhaps new users should be told to stay away from ln and always use cp?
*SCNR*

Anyway, I have seen the confusion about ln usage by inexperienced
users and just wanted to chime in. The original posters suggestion of
a --reverse-order option would make matters worse IMHO.

Thanks,
Erik