Re: [PATCH] latest ash has broken 'echo' command

[Andrew Josey <ajosey@rdg.opengroup.org>]

Apologies for further email.   I missed some subtle differences
in the wording.. "need not" vs "shall not"
>
> Its much better than this.
>
> SUS says -n is invalid and not allowed but you must support \c etc
> POSIX says -n is valid and that you must not support \c

Existing POSIX.2 says implementations need not
support options, and then says if the first operand is "-n" or operands
contain a backslash then its implementation defined - thus basically
allowing but not requiring existing behaviors .

Whereas, SUS requires an implementation shall not support options,
and did not define behavior for an operand consisting of the string "-n"

The Draft POSIX revision is now aligned with the SUS. I'll raise the
issue (a bug report was received on the SUS defect list) with the
Austin Group.

regards
Andrew