Re: du Bug?

2006-01-29 Thread Gus Michel
ice yahoo.es> writes: > > > Hi, > > I have a cuestion. Why en HPUX system when you type a du over an > empty directory you receive a zero size directory and when you do > over a Linux system you receive 4 kB for each directory. > > If you test it over a directory with many subdirectory you ma

Re: changes (bugs?) in date --date=

2006-01-29 Thread Paul Eggert
"Gus Michel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > (Besides the source) is there any documentation to reliably predict > what is meant by date strings which mix [partial] absolute time > references and relative ones? Sorry, no. Perhaps some day we can all come to a consensus on what that sort of string

Re: making coreutils depend on c99

2006-01-29 Thread Paul Eggert
Albert Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:51:50PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: >> So, people building coreutils will have a choice: apply the >> c99->c89 patch or install a modern compiler and use that >> instead of the vendor-supplied one. > > There are two issues with C9

Re: making coreutils depend on c99

2006-01-29 Thread Albert Chin
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 08:17:37PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > Albert Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2005 at 07:51:50PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> So, people building coreutils will have a choice: apply the > >> c99->c89 patch or install a modern compiler and use that

Re: 5.93 tail -N foo bar invalid option

2006-01-29 Thread Paul Eggert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes: > In coreutils 5.93, with _POSIX2_VERSION=0 (and POSIXLY_CORRECT unset), > touch foo bar > tail -3 foo bar > yields the error > tail: invalid option -- 3 > Both `tail -3 foo' and `head -3 foo bar' are ok. Well, that's a long story. 7th Edition Unix "

Re: making coreutils depend on c99

2006-01-29 Thread Paul Eggert
Albert Chin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Substitute the code in the c99.c file with any > other C99 idiom and the results should be the same. That hasn't been my experience. For example, many C89 compilers support "long long" in some form, even though it's a C99 idiom. Similarly for compound li