Re: [PATCH] latest ash has broken 'echo' command
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Marek Habersack wrote:
> * Stuart Anderson said:
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Marek Habersack wrote:
> >
> > > I don't see any reason to follow any other standard right now. POSIX is
> > > everywhere in GNU, and Debian *is* GNU. Also, POSIX - as imperfect as it
> > > might be in some places - is a well established standard, and a damned good
> > > one, IMHO.
> >
> > If we limit ourselves to POSIX only, then either
> >
> > 1) the LSB will not contain enough stuff to be able to
> > do anything useful, or
> > 2) We will never finish the LSB because we have 100's of pages of
> > specifications that need writing to cover the things not in POSIX.
> Note that I said "right now" above. If LSB developes into something really
> functional and useful, then there's no reason not to follow it. It's just
> not ready yet.
I don't see the point of changing the basis of the LSB once it becomes useful.
It seems like we should start out with things set up the way we want them to be
set up once we are finished.
Maybe I'm still mis-understanding what you are saying.
> > We are using SUS as the base because it provides a large chunck of the pages
> > mentioned in #2.
> But, as we can see, it has some err... not fully thought over points...
Yes, this is true. There were a lot of "political" compromises involved in
developing the SUS.
> Why couldn't SuS fill out just the gaps that aren't in POSIX?
The SUS evolved from standards that were supersets of POSIX. As more standards
got merged into the SUS, the more compromises had to be made.
I'm hoping that the Auston Group can iron out a lot of these inconsistancies.
I think that the more things like this we can identifiy (quickly), the better
as it can be used as input to the Austin Group.
> Then the 100's of pages you mention would be filled. SuS could just be
> used where POSIX doesn't get.
I did consider trying to specify POSIX for some things and SUS for the rest. It
turned into a big headache trying to keep track of what was what, and I think
it would be confusing to someone trying to use the LSB to have to keep track
of so many details. This decision can be revisited if evidence warrants it.
Stuart
Stuart R. Anderson anderson@metrolink.com
Metro Link Incorporated South Carolina Office
4711 North Powerline Road 129 Secret Cove Drive
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 Lexington, SC 29072
voice: 954.938.0283 voice: 803.951.3630
fax: 954.938.1982 SkyTel: 800.405.3401
http://www.metrolink.com/
Reply to: