bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g (original) (raw)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
From: | Paul Eggert |
---|---|
Subject: | bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g |
Date: | Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:38:32 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1 |
On 07/04/2012 01:11 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
df -k and df -m both work but only df -k is mentioned as part of df -- help. So, the omission to document -m is IMO a bug.
I think the general idea is that -k was a mistake, but it's standardized, and that we don't want to have options -m, -g, -t, -p, -e, -z, -y for the other sizes (among other things -t is already taken). -m is there only for BSD compatibility but we don't want to publicize it and we may want to take it back at some point.
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Andreas Jaeger, 2012/07/04
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g,Paul Eggert <=
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Paul Eggert, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Eric Blake, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Jim Meyering, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Jim Meyering, 2012/07/05
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Bernhard Voelker, 2012/07/11
* bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g, Jim Meyering, 2012/07/11
- bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g,Paul Eggert <=
- Prev by Date:bug#11859: Reporting Bug (Enhancement) : Interactive Command for Copying Files (cp -i)
- Next by Date:bug#11859: Reporting Bug (Enhancement) : Interactive Command for Copying Files (cp -i)
- Previous by thread:bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g
- Next by thread:bug#11858: df -m undocumented, why no df -g
- Index(es):