From: krewat@kilonet.net (Arthur Krewat)
Subject: [TUHS] 'Command subcommand ...' history
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:46:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a704a58c-b720-f263-453b-dc02e06754e4@kilonet.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <29D69C88-7B0A-40F9-AF4D-68705E8FC514@tfeb.org>
The current SCCS certainly takes subcommands, but I have no idea if it
started out that way.
ifconfig is more a set of flags than subcommands.
And don't get me started about dd - who wrote that anyway? Must have
been an IBM guy :)
dd breaks all the norms for using shell wildcard expansions. You can't
do: dd if=*.tar of=/dev/rmt/0cbn bs=128k
Assuming, of course, you only had one tar file you wanted to write to tape.
On 3/24/2017 11:42 AM, Tim Bradshaw wrote:
> Lots of tools now seem to use this strategy: there's some kind of wrapper which has its own set of commands (which in turn might have further subcommands). So for instance
>
> git remote add ...
>
> is a two layer thing.
>
> Without getting into an argument about whether that's a reasonable or ideologically-correct approach, I was wondering what the early examples of this kind of wrapper-command approach were. I think the first time I noticed it was CVS, which made you say `cvs co ...` where RCS & SCCS had a bunch of individual commands (actually: did SCCS?). But I think it's possible to argue that ifconfig was an earlier example of the same thing. I was thinking about dd as well, but I don't think that's the same: they're really options not commands I think.
>
> Relatedly, does this style originate on some other OS?
>
> --tim
>
> (I realise that in the case of many of these things, particularly git, the wrapper is just dispatching to other tools that do the werk: it's the command style I'm interested in not how it's implemented.)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-24 21:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-24 15:42 Tim Bradshaw
2017-03-24 15:44 ` Larry McVoy
2017-03-28 1:08 ` Clem Cole
2017-03-24 21:46 ` Arthur Krewat [this message]
2017-03-24 21:55 ` Paul Winalski
2017-03-28 19:55 Doug McIlroy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a704a58c-b720-f263-453b-dc02e06754e4@kilonet.net \
--to=krewat@kilonet.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).