Re: mktexpk: non-POSIX compliant use of "tail"

[Jim Meyering]

Paul Eggert <address@hidden> wrote:
> address@hidden (Karl Berry) writes:
>
>> What harm can there be in *GNU* tail always accepting tail -10?
>
> I am becoming more inclined to agree with you.  I don't know about
> Jim, though.

I agree.  I don't like it, but think it is necessary.
I think the best we can do is to `undocument' the old usage,
as Paul suggested.

After recently fixing bugs (albeit a little obscure) in the mixing
of short/obsolete and long-named options of both pr and uniq,
I would have liked to maintain only one set of options,
but am resigned to being stuck with both.