Syntax, shall we?

Mark Ellis mark.uzumati at
Fri Jan 25 02:09:11 PST 2002

On 2002.01.24 18:15 Neven Has wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:35:59AM -0800, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:
> > Some tags we were using, like <patch>, <link>, <copy> and so forth,
> you
> > could actually supply command line options.  This is totally non
> > portable.  What if someone wrote an implementation and all the
> > functality of <link> was done with system calls?
> Yeah, this is why instead of "-f" and friends, we added
> <options>force</options> and friends. Not a perfect solution,
> but definitely better.
> What do you thing about this issue BTW (I haven't covered this in
> my other mail)?

Slight aside, or maybe not, i've been thinking we should split the 
archive <option> into recursive and keep_permissions to be a bit more 
flexible, providing someone doesn't come up with a better idea of 
course :)

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list