Re: New packages and cross-config.gnu
> I assume you mean adding Hurd support to shellutils/fileutils. Well I
> don't think that's appropriate. `su' is a totally different beast on
> the Hurd, and much more powerful. BTW, keep in mind that you can't do
> `su -c COMMAND' to execute COMMAND as root, I don't know if any debian
> scripts use this.
As I've recently posted, I agree and think we should rename the Hurd's su
program so that /bin/su is the one from fileutils that has canonical Unix
behavior.
> `uptime' comes almost for free (it is a shell script that calls `w -u'.
On my Linux system, uptime and w come from procps, not from sh-utils.
So it should be fine to provide these in the hurd package as we do now.
> `sync' is an almost trivial program, but including it in fileutils would
> mean we lose the nice `argp' parsing. I will ask Jim Meyering if it is
> possible to not install the programs on the Hurd.
I have recently added some useful extra functionality to the Hurd's sync
program, but in its canonical use with no arguments it is just the same as
the usual Unix version that calls the `sync' function. Since I just added
these options days ago, there is nothing that depends on them. I think it
is fine for sync to be the old one from fileutils. I will rename the Hurd
program to `syncfs' or something like that (the new argument parsing I
added lets you sync particular filesystems rather than everything, and
control the flags in the Hurd RPC).
Reply to: