Jim Meyering wrote:
Linda Walsh wrote:
...
GNU needs to be clear their priorities -- maintaining software
freedom, or bowing down to corporate powers... POSIX isn't
While POSIX is in general a very good baseline, no one here conforms
blindly. If POSIX is wrong, we'll lobby to change it, or, when
that fails, maybe relegate the undesirable required behavior to when
POSIXLY_CORRECT is set, or even simply ignore it. In fact, over the
years, I have deliberately made a few GNU tools contravene some aspects
of POSIX-specified behavior that I felt were counterproductive.
We try to make the tools as useful as possible, sometimes adding features
when we deem them worthwhile. However, we are very much against changing
the *default* behavior (behavior that has been that way for over 20
years and that is compatible with all other vendor-supplied rm programs)
without a very good reason.
----
So if I make it enabled with an ENV var set to RM_FILES_DEPTH_FIRST, to
enable
the behavior, then you'd have no problem accepting the patch?
