Re: RFC: cksum --base64/-b support

[Pádraig Brady]

On 31/01/2023 06:07, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:17 AM Pádraig Brady <P@draigbrady.com> wrote:
> > BTW I noted the following possible option when I recently refactored cksum:
> >
> >     --digest_format={int, hex, base64, binary}
> >         /* cksum output formats:
> >            int (sum, and cksum default),
> >            hex (rest default),
> >            b64 (to reduce size),
> >            bin (would auto suppress names? restrict to single argument? */
>
> I'm not sure how --digest-format=int -a sha1 would work.

yes that would be awkward, "int" is probably not worth supporting

> Or --digest-format=bin -a sum

That would be the bytes in network byte order.
This would be a separate patch anyway.
If we're just considering base64 with no possibility of a future other encoding 
option,
then we can stick with --base64 and --raw to select between base64 and binary.

> But doing it that way does provide a way to override a prior --base64 option.
> Without that, is a --hex option warranted?

If --hex was warranted then that would tip the balance
in favor of a single --digest-format={base16,base64,binary} option.
I'm 50:50 on whether -b would need to be overridden like that though.
I.e. whether -b would be set as a default in a script or alias.

cheers,
Pádraig