Re: Bug#160849: coreutils: bug report for GNU Core Utils

[Andreas Schwab]

Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:

> Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>>> Thanks, but that's not accurate, since --reply=no has no effect
>>> if it *precedes* a -i (aka --reply=query) option, and if it
>>> follows -i, then the -i is disregarded.
>>
>> Why not just say that -i/-f/--reply override each other and the last one
>> wins?
>
> The --help output already mentions that -i and -f each have --reply=...
> equivalents, but I'd welcome a specific addition to that effect.

That the options are overriding each other is not immediately clear from a
cursory look, since the --reply equivalences are parenthetical remarks
that are easy to read over.  How about writing it like this:

  -f, --force, --reply=yes     do not prompt before overwriting
  -i, --interactive, --reply=query
                               prompt before overwrite
      --reply={yes,no,query}   specify how to handle the prompt about an
                                 existing destination file

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, address@hidden
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."