Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> 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 <bry...@gmail.com> 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 it used with -count as the first argument, can't > > > > say it's every occoured to me to type "head file -10". > > > > That is not what I proposed. Reread my first message: > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=163388435528203&w=2 > > i.e. "head -2 -3 somefile" is taken as -3. > > This is unportable syntax, GNU head doesn't support it, current OpenBSD head > doesn't support it, and it doesn't seem to be really meaningful. > Additionally I don't think we've ever had a problem with this in ports. > I think we would be better served to keep things as-is and not support it. > Seems that FreeBSD is the odd one out here?
Indeed, the problem is our code supports this but noone else supports it well, someone might accidentally use it in a script they write on OpenBSD and... it is unportable, the behaviour is either different, or an error condition So who benefits? Noone, the way I see it.
