Syntax, shall we?
al593181 at mail.mty.itesm.mx
Thu Jan 24 20:40:35 PST 2002
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 10:59:29PM -0500, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:15:48PM +0100, Neven Has wrote:
> > Yeah, this is why instead of "-f" and friends, we added
> > <options>force</options> and friends. Not a perfect solution,
> > but definitely better.
> I agree it's extremely portable that way. The only (and major) downside is
> we'd have to account for every option that 'cp' knows about so people can
> use it. That certainly makes for a big fat DTD.
> Perhaps we have to discuss, not now but way later down the road, if we want
> to limit this (and if special flags are needed, use <system_command> or
> something like that)
It whould be simpler if we can say... everything inside options tags is
going to be prefixed with --<option> and passed to the shell, tat way we
can forget about <system_command> and and doesn't need to account every
Unfortunately we are hidding from the shell. :/
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message
More information about the alfs-discuss