On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 1:21 AM, Erik Trulsson <ertr1...@student.uu.se> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:27:40PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: >> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> >> > So what I did was I wrote up a patch to be *I know... here it comes* >> > more like GNU coreutils' copy of mktemp. >> >> What's the motivation for this? I'm a little confused about why we'd >> want to change this when the -t option already exists. Also, does POSIX >> say anything about what the default should be? > > POSIX does not define the mktemp(1) utility as far as I can tell, and > thus says nothing about the default. > > The HISTORY section in the manpage says that mktemp(1) originated with > OpenBSD so if anything it is the OpenBSD implementation that ought to > be used as a reference. > > If the GNU implementation behaves differently, then I would say it is > likely the GNU version which is wrong.
I'm not going to get into that bikeshed topic. I'm not arguing about what's right or wrong -- I just prefer not dealing with quirks between different systems, like having to type `find .' instead of just `find', which searches $PWD first with coreutil's find, or having to type the entry in fstab exactly when doing a mount or unmount because the directory isn't properly abspath'ed. FreeBSD is a great system; if there are ways that I can possibly make it better by adding smart defaults I will propose them wherever I possibly can, because if I've thought of something, I'm pretty sure I'm not the first one to have thought of it. Thanks, -Garrett _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
