[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g |
Date: |
Thu, 05 Jul 2012 17:08:47 +0200 |
Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 07/05/2012 02:35 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> However, I'm tempted to remove it directly this time, since it's been
>> undocumented for a while:
>>
>> 5 years in df.1 and df --help: COREUTILS-6_9-151-g1e07a21
>> 11 years in coreutils.texi: FILEUTILS-4_1_4-28-gf5bf6fe
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> I agree, the option has been added to df in 1996, and declared
> obsolescent in 2001, so the period since the latter is twice as
> long as the active use.
>
> And it's very easy to s/--megabytes/-BM/ ...
More important than 2001 is the year in which we removed
the reference from the man page and from --help: 2007
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Andreas Jaeger, 2012/07/04
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Paul Eggert, 2012/07/04
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/05
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Paul Eggert, 2012/07/05
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Eric Blake, 2012/07/05
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Jim Meyering, 2012/07/05
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/05
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g,
Jim Meyering <=
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/11
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Jim Meyering, 2012/07/11