Re: extension of mkisofs for incremental backups
On Mon 1 March 2004 16:23, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> From: Rob Bogus <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >The alternative would be to group them by function, such as
> > putting things which affect the device (dev=, speed=, burnfree,
> > etc) in one group, things which affect format (-D -R -N, etc)
> > in another, things which affect how the content is scanned (-f,
> > etc), information visibility (various -hide and -hidden
> > options), and rename options (-graft-points, etc).
> >Functional grouping makes it faster to find things if you are
> > looking for "a way to keep long filenames" or something like
> > that, alphabetical is easier if you know the option and want to
> > check what it does.
> Functional grouping makes it harder for the people who need the
> manual because the know little about the program.
That's illogical. If you know little about the program, you are
unlikely to know what a command line switch is called. Rather, you
know what you would like to do. Functional grouping allows you to
select the right group first, and then if necessary read through
all the options. That's better than having to read through all
unrelated options as well.
GPG public key: http://home.student.utwente.nl/l.e.veen/lourens.key