| > Yes, thank you, I know this. This is what I do. But pardon me, this
| > is by no means something I consider ``natural''.
|
| I said this is the natural way to "follow the spec". Whether it seems
| entirely natural as a way to do the job is not the question.
|
| We are not going to change the spec just to make implementations more
| elegant. There are more important things at stake. Please don't ask
| me to make changes for such minor reasons.
Elegance of the implementation is one part of my point, the most
important one is that it is a gratuitous additional burden put on the
back of maintainers who are already tired of fighting with portability
issues. The result is that the standards are most of the time not
followed, and therefore
You (as an installer) should *never* expect this part of the
standard being implemented.
That's why, although I agree changing a spec is bad in general, in the
present case I don't think it matters that much. You just cannot
expect a package to meet these specs.
This feature is totally useless but costly. Up to now not a single
person ever came and demonstrated the usefulness of this.
But that's the end of the debate as far as I'm concerned.
