On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 09:13:16AM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 08:26:04PM -0400, gwes wrote:
> > On 10/10/21 5:03 PM, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > If we want to have the unportable legacy syntax then it should work
> > > like other option arguments.
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 08:26:04PM -0400, gwes wrote:
> On 10/10/21 5:03 PM, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > If we want to have the unportable legacy syntax then it should work
> > like other option arguments. Option arguments can be respecified
> > multiple times in most other utilities.
On 10/10/21 5:03 PM, Scott Cheloha wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:36:32PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Stuart Henderson wrote:
x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
Bryan Steele wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:36:32PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM
Stuart Henderson wrote:
x1> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600,
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 09:11:50PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > Bryan Steele wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > > On
On 2021/10/10 14:26, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Bryan Steele wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > > did anyone
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 02:26:32PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > Bryan Steele wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:31:22PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Bryan Steele wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of
Bryan Steele wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
> >
> > I don't understand the question.
>
> I've only ever seen
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:18:55PM -0500, Scott Cheloha wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
>
> I don't understand the question.
I've only ever seen it used with -count as the first
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:51:29AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
I don't understand the question.
The -count syntax was fully supported in the first revision of head(1):
did anyone ever use it this way, or are you getting ahead of yourself.
Scott Cheloha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> head(1) takes line count arguments in two ways. The legacy (1977)
> syntax is "-count" [1]. The "new" (1992) syntax is "-n count" [2].
> In either case, "count" must be a positive decimal
13 matches
Mail list logo
