[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ash/echo/POSIX/SUS



On Sat, Oct 30, 1999 at 09:06:54AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> If only there were a standard for such a beast, then we can put that into our
> policy.  As it stands, all we have is POSIX.2.  Raul has proposed a change to
> our policy so that -n has been explicitly allowed. 

No. POSIX already allowed it. You forced a policy proposal to mandate
existing legal behavior. This is, IMHO, turning into one of our greatest
problems: we can't just work together and find a common-sense solution
to our problems. Instead, people intentionally trip each other up and
wield the policy document like a club to batter down other developers.
If we were paying lawyers to come up with this thing I could understand
the poring over of ever point of legalese...but we're not, and I'm
mystified.  All this talk about echo -n, all the time and bits, and what
we end up with is behavior that we already had, and another policy
change. Are we trying to create a policy document or a distribution?

Mike Stone

Attachment: pgpcCYM332UNt.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: