[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Update of bug #24949 (project coreutils): Status: In Progress => Fixed Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Reply to this item at:

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jim Meyering on 3/24/2009 12:41 PM: >> Subject: [PATCH] pwd: support -L and -P >> > > Thanks for doing that! It looks fine, modulo a couple nits: > - remove this item from TODO > - use SAME_INODE > - use $(...) rather than `...` in

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Eric Blake wrote: > According to Eric Blake on 3/23/2009 2:53 PM: >> Follow-up Comment #3, bug #24949 (project coreutils): >> >> How about the attached patch? > > To make it easier to review, this is my proposed patch to make pwd > understand -L and -P, per POSIX. I made the choice of having the b

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Eric Blake on 3/23/2009 2:53 PM: > Follow-up Comment #3, bug #24949 (project coreutils): > > How about the attached patch? To make it easier to review, this is my proposed patch to make pwd understand -L and -P, per POSIX. I made the ch

[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Update of bug #24949 (project coreutils): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ericb ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #24949 (project coreutils): How about the attached patch? (file #17780) ___ Additional Item Attachment: File name: coreutils.patch1 Size:9 KB __

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Paul D. Smith wrote: On the other hand, I think it would not actually be that difficult to implement -L. It seems to me that Eric Blake's description of what it would take to adhere to the POSIX standard, as he describes here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-10/msg00258.html

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:33 +, James Youngman wrote: >> If you can rely enough on the platform being POSIX-conforming for -P >> to work, then why not just use Perl's POSIX module? > > On some embedded systems where the rootfs is in a ramdisk I use, for >

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:33 +, James Youngman wrote: > If you can rely enough on the platform being POSIX-conforming for -P > to work, then why not just use Perl's POSIX module? On some embedded systems where the rootfs is in a ramdisk I use, for example, microperl. This is an amazingly flexi

Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 2:04 AM, Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Follow-up Comment #2, bug #24949 (project coreutils): > > The problem is that without -P I can't invoke pwd from things like Perl > portably. If I use "my $pwd = `pwd`;" and it runs a shell and uses the shell > builtin ve

[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #24949 (project coreutils): The problem is that without -P I can't invoke pwd from things like Perl portably. If I use "my $pwd = `pwd`;" and it runs a shell and uses the shell builtin version of pwd, then I get the wrong thing (I explicitly want the "real" path; what P

[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #24949 (project coreutils): This has been brought up repeatedly in the past; see this thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-10/msg00293.html ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

URL: Summary: coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features Project: GNU Core Utilities Submitted by: psmith Submitted on: Wed 26 Nov 2008 03:50:44 PM EST Category: None