this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
881 points (98.5% liked)
linuxmemes
20882 readers
326 users here now
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
- Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
- Be civil
- Post Linux-related content
- No recent reposts
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Actually this reminds me, what is the deal with tar command recommendations to use or not use dash? I know GNU tar accepts both (e.g.)
tar xvf file.tar
andtar -xvf file.tar
, but at some points people were like "NO! Don't use the dash! It's going to maybe cause issues somewhere, who knows!" and I was like "OK". Something to do with people up designing the Unix specs?I didn't even know the dash was optional. I guess you learn something new everyday.
I still use it though. Its how I learned it all those years ago and its ingrained as muscle memory when typing the command.
idk if it's optional why bother typing it
personally, it is a little easier to read, especially in a script. and its more consistent with other commands
No idea, but with tar I never use dashes. Just tar xf away.
POSIX. POSIX didn't get designed but documented behaviour that was portable between different UNIX flavours and was then declared a standard.
If you're annoyed by it just consider the
xvf
intar xvf
to be a subcommand aspull
is ingit pull
. Tar simply has a fancy subcommand syntax. At least it's notdd
.