Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes:
> For what it's worth, Russ's text already seems clear to me. If relaxing
> the requirement by allowing use of some mechanism other than execve to
> run these commands is desirable, something like the following might do.
> Support the command-line option "-e <command>", which creates a new
> terminal window and runs the specified command. <command> may be
> multiple arguments, which form the argument list to the executed
> program. In other words, the behavior is as though the arguments
> were passed directly to execvp, bypassing the shell. (xterm's
> behavior of falling back on using the shell if -e had a single
> argument and exec failed is permissible but not required.)
I like this wording better, and I think it also addresses Thomas's concern
about not specifying the path searching behavior, although it might be
even better to say:
Support the command-line option "-e <command> <arg> ...", which [...]
Either way, seconded.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty4o4kvy....@windlord.stanford.edu
