It's a bit of a strange choice, but if you read the full documentation (man codesign) it's not too confusing actually:<p><pre><code> NAME
codesign — Create and manipulate code signatures
SYNOPSIS
codesign -s identity [-i identifier] [-r requirements] [-fv] path ...
codesign -v [-R requirement] [-v] [path|pid ...]
codesign -d [-v] [path|pid ...]
codesign -h [-v] [pid ...]
codesign --validate-constraint path ...
</code></pre>
The first argument to codesign <i>has</i> to be one of -s, -v, -d, -h, --validate-constraint and in reality it's closer to a subcommand (similar to how git as pull, push, merge etc). After that "-v" works as a regular option.<p>EDIT: I read the man page even further, and I was slightly wrong: It appears to be possible to pass regular options <i>before</i> the operation, but you're required to have one (and only) one operation.
I hate Apple products, but I just hate Windows more and am willing to give Linux a pass more.<p><pre><code> Why are core util programs different?
</code></pre>
Seriously! I know it's BSD based, but let's be real, you _should_ be able to use a command one-to-one from linux to OSX. That should be the goal. These are __core utils__! And you're gonna tell me that flags are different?<p><pre><code> Brittle AI features with obviously insufficient testing
</code></pre>
I'll be fair, Apple isn't alone in this. But have you all heard about augmentations? Do you all dogfood? Seriously, I'll consult because when my partner is on the train I don't want her voice suppressed and the train sounds amplified, I want the opposite. This is a solvable issue... But your features are doing the opposite of what they are intended to. To all AI production people: augment the shit out of your data, scrutinize the shit out of your data, don't throw it at the wall and see what sticks.<p>Apple has been good at design, and due that the "Apple way or the high way" was acceptable. Because at least the "Apple way" made some sense. But now the Apple way isn't about making the product better, it is about making it thinner. I know that's easier, but that's the cost at being on top. Don't abandon what got you there.
The way they disambiguate between the two options feels like it would have been a ton of work to figure out and implement... and for what purpose? I don't understand the user story here. How hard is it to type the long version?
Add this to the growing list of Apple bs that has developed over the past 10 years.<p>Used to be in deep in the ecosystem. Now have been winding down significantly, hardware hasn’t been upgraded since 2017. Various iDevices aging out until bust.<p>Services reduced to bare bones iCloud. Whatever the 200G plan is for keeping basic backups. Otherwise, have self hosted most of their services<p>- iTunes/Music/TV transitioned to media server accessible via VPN<p>- no longer use @icloud.com/@me.com email. Have own mail server with unlimited aliases. No more dealing with hide my address bs<p>- password/credential management migrated to proton pass<p>- cloud storage migrated to self hosted with other providers as backups to the backups (“3-2-1”)<p>Am I now paying for these services that were once “free”? Yes, but I also learn more about the protocols, set up processes, and able to customize for my own needs. No more DRM, lawyer bs that takes away your “paid” (licensed) media, no more Apple wall.
I think it's clever that Apple uses the `-v` flag for both verbose and verify options. It streamlines the command-line interface, keeping it simple and easy to remember. Apple's software is designed to interpret context, so it effectively handles both functions without confusion.