Re: [PATCH] latest ash has broken 'echo' command
On Sun, Oct 24, 1999 at 04:30:46PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
>
> > b) depends where you are from.
> I don't think I understand?
If you have a SYSV background, echo doesn't have options. If you have a BSD
background, echo does have options.
> > > But scripts using -n *are* POSIX compliant *if* they account for the
> > > possibility that the argument might not be implemented in some shell.
> >
> > If they accounted for it, then they wouldn't mind ash changing its behaviour.
> True, but consider the way things are done. Scripts rely on shell, shell is
> the basis, the basis should account for as much possibilities as possible
> without bloating it. And I don't consider -n a bloat... (15 lines of code at
> most, how many bytes? 300?)
You still don't get my main argument. ash's only purpose in life is to act
as /bin/sh. And that means we have to have some restrictions on what
#!/bin/sh scripts can do. Currently this is specified by POSIX.2.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Reply to: