Edgar Toernig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here's a patch.
That patch's revised documentation doesn't quite describe the code code accurately, since "ago" isn't allowed just anywhere: it's allowed only in some places. More important, that patch doesn't fix the bug that prompted the code being the way that it is now. Please see the thread rooted here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2005-07/msg00178.html People have mentioned shell scripts that depend on the old (contrary-to-documentation) behavior. Can you please give some specific examples of these scripts, by name, so that we can see these uses in context? That might help us figure out a patch that will get us out of this mess. Perhaps there's some interpretation that will satisfy both sides. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils