Re: Surprising bug in sort

[Jim Meyering]

Matthew Woehlke <address@hidden> wrote:
> Eric Blake wrote:
>> According to address@hidden on 8/17/2008 10:07 PM:
>>> Thank you very much for the clarification, it makes perfect sense to me
>>> now - as I said I was surprised that I appeared to have found a bug.
>>>
>>> I have now reread the documentation and I still don't think it is
>>> particularly clear...
>>>         "-k, --key=POS1[,POS2]     start a key at POS1, end it at POS2
>>> (origin 1)"
>>> ...does not mean to me that if I don't supply POS2 then include all
>>> fields to the end of the line, but there you go, I don't claim to be a
>>> Unix expert.
>>
>> This question comes up frequently.  Is there some wording we can use to
>> make it more obvious that omitting POS2 implies end of line, while still
>> being brief enough for --help output?
>
> "...end it at POS2 (or the end of the line, if omitted)"?

Sounds good.  Want to write the patch?