On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 17:45:20 -0400
bob > wrote:
> Yeah, it's a real pain when you do 'program -?', and the output
> scrolls way more than one screen's worth, and you can't more it.
man screen
--
J C Lawrence
-(*)Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
> "JP" == Jon Parise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JP> I don't know what possessed me to do this, but see the
JP> attached patch.
Wow, cool! Thanks,
-Barry
___
Mailman-Developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.python.org/mailma
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 05:14:20PM -0400, Barry A. Warsaw wrote:
> > "DC" == David Champion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DC> My feeling on the topic, having seen many programs that swing
> DC> each way, is that usage() should go to stderr when it's caused
> DC> by a usage error
Yeah, it's a real pain when you do 'program -?', and the output scrolls way more than
one screen's worth, and you can't more it.
Bob
David Champion wrote:
>
> * On 2002.10.21, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> * "Chuq Von Rospach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Most of the scripts in the bin/ d
> "DC" == Donn Cave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DC> Incidentally, I note an inconsistency - "mailmanctl" is coded
DC> to write usage to sys.stderr, but stderr is gimmicked by
DC> LogStdErr and actually goes to unit 1, not unit 2.
qrunner is the same. Ug, did someone open up a ca
* On 2002.10.21, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
* "Chuq Von Rospach" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Most of the scripts in the bin/ directory send their usage() output to
> >sys.stderr. Unfortunately, this makes it difficult to pipe the usage
> >output to a program such as more(1) (without redirecti
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Barry A. Warsaw):
| > "JP" == Jon Parise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| JP> 'vim --help' spits its usage output to stdout, as does 'python
| JP> -h'.
|
| JP> I can understand errors being printed to syserr (duh), but
| JP> usage information is more cons
> "JP" == Jon Parise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JP> 'vim --help' spits its usage output to stdout, as does 'python
JP> -h'.
JP> I can understand errors being printed to syserr (duh), but
JP> usage information is more consumer grade, I think.
I could almost be convinced that
Most of the scripts in the bin/ directory send their usage() output to
sys.stderr. Unfortunately, this makes it difficult to pipe the usage
output to a program such as more(1) (without redirecting stderr to
stdout).
Thoughts?
--
Jon Parise ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) :: http://www.csh.rit.edu/~jon/
On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 01:03:23PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> >Most of the scripts in the bin/ directory send their usage() output to
> >sys.stderr. Unfortunately, this makes it difficult to pipe the usage
> >output to a program such as more(1) (without redirecting stderr to
> >stdout).
>
Most of the scripts in the bin/ directory send their usage() output to
sys.stderr. Unfortunately, this makes it difficult to pipe the usage
output to a program such as more(1) (without redirecting stderr to
stdout).
Thoughts?
that's standard programming. Feature, not bug.
--
Chuq Von Rospach,
11 matches
Mail list logo
