Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards Subject: Re: more rm insanity Message-ID: <6799@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Sat, 5-Dec-87 10:41:49 EST Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6799 Posted: Sat Dec 5 10:41:49 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 10-Dec-87 06:04:03 EST References: <9593@mimsy.UUCP> <1413@bgsuvax.UUCP> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB)) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 13 In article <1413@bgsuvax.UUCP> denbeste@bgsuvax.UUCP (William C. DenBesten) writes: >and notice that rm has a (null) option, -, that causes it to not treat args >beginning with a - as a switch, so all you have to do is type: Great, another violation of the command syntax standard, and one that is incompatible with previous practice as well. "-" traditionally has been shorthand for the standard input, as in myprog | cat header - trailer | troff | dimp On sane systems, "--" on practically ANY command marks the end of the option arguments. It is much better to have a universal rule than a special hack in a particular command.