When specifying a group with the chown command, is the format using . (dot) as the delimiter a specification?

If you subtract chown man on Ubuntu, the format is written in two lines as follows:

SYNOPSIS
      chown[OPTION]...[OWNER][:[GROUP]] FILE...
      chown [OPTION]...--reference=RFILE FILE...

Some of the chown man posted online were listed in three lines, plus the format .GROUP.

chown [options]...OWNER [.[GROUP]] FILE...
chown [options]....GROUP FILE...
chown [options]...--reference=RFILE FILE...

https://linuxjm.osdn.jp/html/GNU_fileutils/man1/chown.1.html

When I actually tried the format .GROUP, it looks like it's working as intended, but is the format .GROUP the specification of chown
Is it a deprecated format that remains due to past compatibility?

$chown.testtest.txt

linux ubuntu

2022-09-30 22:05

2 Answers

Also covered by the previous answer, you should be aware that Linux is a collection of external packages.

If you search Ubuntu for a package, you can see that chown is provided in the GNU core utilities package.
GNU core utilities (or rather GNU's tools) traditionally do not expect much from manpage and tend to be written in their own info system.You can now browse online, and there is also a chown page.Here is

Some older scripts may still use ‘.’ in place of the ‘:’ separator. POSIX 1003.1-2001 (see Standards conformance) does not require support for that, but for backward compatibility GNU chown supports ‘.’ so long as no ambiguity results, although it issues a warning and support may be removed in future versions. New scripts should avoid the use of ‘.’ because it is not portable, and because it has undesirable results if the entire owner '.' 'group happiness to identify a user where name contains '.'

and . notation are left for compatibility and will be removed in the future.

In addition, you may have referred to https://linuxjm.osdn.jp/html/GNU_fileutils/man1/chown.1.html, but fileutils was renamed coreutils in 2002 when it was integrated with other packages.In other words, you should understand that the document is more than 20 years old.

2022-09-30 22:05

According to Oira's memory,

You can start group naming with . in the old specification of chown
To accommodate writing like chown firstname.familyname files, there was a specification change in chown to start with : for group name specification.

https://serverfault.com/questions/194295/

There is no chown:.soft user ID for chown.soft hoge.txt~ in hppa 2.0w-hp-hpux 11.11 of the Eulan, but chown.soft hoge.txt~, which is quite old.

You may want to understand that chown.group cannot be used in modern times.

chown:group is acceptable.

2022-09-30 22:05

If you have any answers or tips

Popular Tags

python x 4647

android x 1593

java x 1494

javascript x 1427

c x 927

c++ x 878

ruby-on-rails x 696

php x 692

python3 x 685

html x 656