Subject: Re: bug#5832: Feature request: uniq -k

From: Jim Meyering <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:42:39 +0200

Raphael Clifford wrote:
> Yes http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-06/msg00211.html
> in particular is pretty much exactly the same feature request.
>
> What is the current thinking on this?

uniq's -k is still something we'd like.

>> uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2006-06/msg00168.html

I glanced through most of that thread, and the guidance is still valid.
If you are interested, be sure to start the copyright
assignment paperwork:

    http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/coreutils.git/tree/HACKING#n327 copyright

and to read/follow the other guidelines in HACKING.

2nd most important: to save yourself the pain of reworking big chunks
of code, and to keep review request size manageable, I suggest
you keep the mailing list in the loop on what you're doing/planning.