Re: LSB1.1: /proc/cpuinfo
>From email@example.com Fri Jan 4 15:46:26 2002
>On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 03:34:34PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> "How could a standard compliance test find out that GNU rm includes a nonstandard
>> option that gives GNU rm properties that are not allowed from SUSv2?"
>It's irrelevant. If the standard says that undefined options produce
>undefined behavior, the conclusion is obvious. If the standard says that
>undefined options are disallowed, then you test to see whether the
>program accepts undefined options. IOW, the specific behavior of
>undefined options is orthogonal to your test.
For you too: Please READ the standard and try to understand it before you start
argumenting about it.
EMail:firstname.lastname@example.org (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
email@example.com (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
firstname.lastname@example.org (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.gmd.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.fokus.gmd.de/pub/unix