Re: ash/echo/POSIX/SUS
Hi,
>>"David" == David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> writes:
David> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 10:18:23AM -0500, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
David> No, it's not his contention. It's his contention that an echo
David> that doesn't accept -n doesn't violate POSIX, so a script that
David> depened on an echo that accepts -n isn't POSIX complaint.
That's fine and dandy. What does that have to do wish ash?
David> It says that a script that is #!/bin/sh must run on any POSIX shell,
David> hence such a script must not depend on echo -n.
Again, why does this change ash's behaviour? Why should a
shell not be lax in accepting behaviour that is not in
violation of POSIX?
David> Come on. While it's arguable wheather or not ash's echo should
David> allow -n, the facts of the matter seem clear by now for anyone
David> paying attention.
The facts may be clear, but the conclusions that people seem
to be srawin from it are, umm, debatable?
David> Take it over to debian-policy and argue over what if anything
David> should be changed in policy, but enough on debian-devel.
I have yet to see anything here that requires change in
policy.
manoj
--
You have no real enemies.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
Reply to: