On 09/02/2013 04:03 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: > I'd not updated the TODO, but the details in 9987 above > suggested that -z, --zero would be better since most tools use that.
I'd personally prefer -0 because burning the -z short option may be problematic for future extensions while the only use of the -0 option in any program is "separate output by NULs". But I'm game if you prefer -z. > Also mentioned there was only honoring -z when the groups for > a single user were being output. I.E. no double NUL stuff. > But I'm not against the double NUL approach really. thanks, then I'll keep it. > It would be good I think to have a separate patch though > that aligned with other systems and didn't output the > "user:" at the start of the line when only a single user is specified. Interestingly, groups(1) doesn't seem to be specified by the OpenGroup documents, only id(1): http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/id.html Is there any other resource? But I agree, outputting the "user:" prefix for only one argument seems to be silly. Thanks! Have a nice day, Berny
