[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554)
From: |
Jérémy Compostella |
Subject: |
Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554) |
Date: |
Sun, 19 Feb 2012 19:30:16 +0100 |
> On 02/19/2012 12:54 PM, Jérémy Compostella wrote:
> > Pádraig,
> >
> > I replaced --suffix with --additional-suffix and made some cleaning.
> >
> > Feel free to comment the attached patch.
>
> Logic is perfect again.
Thanks :)
> I adjusted the help output a little like:
>
> - -a, --suffix-length=N use suffixes of length N (default %d)\n\
> - --additional-suffix=SUFFIX append an additional SUFFIX to output file\n\
> - names. SUFFIX must not contain slash.\n\
> + -a, --suffix-length=N generate suffixes of length N (default %d)\n\
> + --additional-suffix=SUFFIX append an additional SUFFIX to file names.\n\
I'm just wondering why did you removed the slash warning ? This warning
is maybe too much in the command usage but IMHO the man page should
mention it. Moreover, the mktemp mention this "restriction" on its
--suffix option this way.
Cheers,
Jérémy
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Jérémy Compostella, 2012/02/06
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Jérémy Compostella, 2012/02/18
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Pádraig Brady, 2012/02/18
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Jérémy Compostella, 2012/02/18
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Pádraig Brady, 2012/02/18
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Jérémy Compostella, 2012/02/19
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Pádraig Brady, 2012/02/19
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554),
Jérémy Compostella <=
- Re: bug#6554: [PATCH] split: Additional suffix for split (bug#6554), Pádraig Brady, 2012/02/19