While learning how to use cp parameters to make cp back up my data as I wanted, I noticed an interesting difference between Linux and MS-DOS, which I was familiar with during its heyday. Using cp in Linux, I wanted the parameters -u, -r and -v, so the syntax was "cp -urv". In DOS,if cp had been the copy command, the syntax of the parameters would be "-u -r -v". I think that makes more sense, because if I looked at "-urv" for the first time and hadn't seen the man page, how would I be sure they were three separate parameters rather than the parameter "urv"?

In some distro, take Gentoo for example, when invoking emerge you might need to add --pretend --verbose to enter parameter 'pretend & verbose'; hence, the emerge -pv is only short form of both parameter.

I guess you get the idea.

Would you prefer it to make more sense the first time, or every other time? You could very well use cp -u -r -v in Linux, but the ability to combine "short options" makes sense in the long run. Like hurry_hui said, the distinction between "short options" and "long options" is - and -- respectively. When I instruct people in the use of *nix, syntax is lesson 0.2.

Oh--I didn't know both ways worked.

They do indeed work. As an example, I use this command from time to time.