Re: coreutils-6.11 released

Elbert Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > Hope it's fixable :) Anything is fixable ;-) > Jim Meyering wrote: >> Elbert Pol<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... >>> make.exe[2]: Entering directory `U:/coreutils-6.11/man' >>> make.exe[2]: *** No rule to make target `uname.1 >>> ', needed by `all-am'.

Re: Bash vs. sh

"Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Coreutils maintainers, > > It appears that Bison's bootstrap script is occasionally sync'ed against > Coreutils'. Paul Hilfinger, one of the Bison developers, recently made > the discovery quoted below, which I figure might also be relevant to > Coreuti

Re: Bash vs. sh

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 3:42 AM: | I'll probably change the instructions in README-hacking to mention | that you may have to run "bash ./bootstrap" rather than | | $ ./bootstrap | | if your system's /bin/sh is substandard. Sounds

Re: Bash vs. sh

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 3:42 AM: > | I'll probably change the instructions in README-hacking to mention > | that you may have to run "bash ./bootstrap" rather than > | > | $ ./bootstrap > | > | if your system's /bin/sh is substandard. > >

retaining AFS-specific nameless group IDs (PAG) in `id' and `groups'

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Didi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> If by "unknown" you mean nameless, that's not what the patch does. >>> Such a patch would not even have been considered. >> >> I agree that hiding this information in some cases might not be >> optimal, but the main pro

FYI: 3 small patches

FYI, here are 3 changes I've just pushed: Accommodate building on OS/2 (www.ecomstation.com Ecs v2 rc4) * configure.ac: Filter out carriage returns in more places. Reported by Elbert Pol, details here: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.org.fsf.announce/867/focus=13332

[PATCH] id should not show selinux context when user is specified

Hello, when using id SELinux context of the user who executed id command is printed. This is quiet misleading and should be avoided. Problem reported in RH bugzilla #443485 by Ronny Buchmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Patch changing the id behaviour to "don't show scontext when user is specified" is at

Re: [PATCH] md5sum+sha*sum: add option --quiet/-q to suppress OK messages

Erik Auerswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMHO md5sum and sha*sum are too verbose by default, especially when > checking a large collection of files with only a few failing validation. > Therefore I'd like to see an option added to suppress just the output > for successfully verified files. > > T

Re: [PATCH] id should not show selinux context when user is specified

Ondřej Vašík <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > +/* If true, id is used on specified user/group name */ > +static bool specified_name = false; > + > /* The real and effective IDs of the user to print. */ > static uid_t ruid, euid; > static gid_t rgid, egid; > @@ -170,7 +173,7 @@ main (int argc, ch

Re: [PATCH] md5sum+sha*sum: add option --quiet/-q to suppress OK messages

Hi, On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 06:05:48PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > Erik Auerswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IMHO md5sum and sha*sum are too verbose by default, especially when > > checking a large collection of files with only a few failing validation. > > Therefore I'd like to see an option

Re: [PATCH] md5sum+sha*sum: add option --quiet/-q to suppress OK messages

Erik Auerswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 06:05:48PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: >> Erik Auerswald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > IMHO md5sum and sha*sum are too verbose by default, especially when >> > checking a large collection of files with only a few failing validatio

Re: [PATCH] Use a hash rather than a linked-list for cycle check in cp

On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:34 PM, Bo Borgerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The performance benefit is there, but on my machine with a PATH_MAX of > 4096 it's hard to see, because the userland work `cp' does is dwarfed > by the work the kernel does on its behalf: Many platforms allow you to cre

Re: coreutils-6.11 released

On 19.04.2008 23:21, Jim Meyering wrote: Coreutils version 6.11 has been released. This is a stable release. Hello, My build fails on a Solaris 8 machine, using gcc-4.1.0. When building "sort", I get: .../gcc -std=gnu99 -O2 -Wl,--as-needed -o sort sort.o ../lib/libcoreutils.a ../lib/libc

ls --color=tty

Hello, Yesterday, I modified a shell script and some how it became non-executable (-rw-r--r--) but it is still list in green color. I did not notice the permission change until this morning when my cron jobs failed. I can not reproduce this scenario OS: Linux 2.4.21-27.ELsmp Term: PuTTY XTER

md5sum is sensitive to line terminator of md5 file

Hi, I have just noticed that checking md5 hashes in an correctly formated md5 file fails on linux if the file has crlf line terminators. It gives unhelpful and incorrectly formatted errors messages such as, #line in checksums.md5 8a107f691b48ffe203938be1ed6cdbe7 *04 - Totnes Bickering Fair.mp3

Re: PATH and security

Well, more generally I like the fact that changing the value of $PWD doesn't modify the meaning of programs. James. ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

Re: [PATCH] Use a hash rather than a linked-list for cycle check in cp

"Bo Borgerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This addresses a FIXME in src/copy.c: > > > -/* FIXME: rewrite this to use a hash table so we avoid the quadratic > - performance hit that's probably noticeable only on trees deeper > - than a few hundred levels. See use of active_dir_map in rem

Re: FYI: 3 small patches

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 8:28 AM: | Without a guard like this, it is far too easy to apply a patch | prepared against a preceding release, and not notice that a NEWS | entry is inserted into the wrong block. | * maint.mk (sc_immutable_NE

Re: Bash vs. sh

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 7:23 AM: > |> Is it worth writing bootstrap.m4sh, and running it through autom4te to get > |> the shell selection code from autoconf with minimal effort on your part? > |> You'd still probably want to check in the gener

Re: FYI: 3 small patches

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 8:28 AM: > | Without a guard like this, it is far too easy to apply a patch > | prepared against a preceding release, and not notice that a NEWS > | entry is inserted into the wrong block. > | * maint.mk (sc_immutable_NE

Re: md5sum is sensitive to line terminator of md5 file

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to John Blythe on 4/22/2008 12:27 PM: | Hi, I have just noticed that checking md5 hashes in an correctly | formated md5 file fails on linux if the file | has crlf line terminators. This has been previously reported (and even some tentative

Re: Bash vs. sh

"Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> > as the preferred method for getting started, avoiding the need to check in >> > bootstrap? Or even have a two-level bootstrap: ./bootstrap is a simple >> > checked-in wrapper which portably calls autom4te

Re: [PATCH] Use a hash rather than a linked-list for cycle check in cp

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Bo, > > Thanks for that patch. > > However, let's see if Cai Xianchao and Li Zefan > are still working on rewriting cp to use openat-style functions. > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/12041

Re: [PATCH] Use a hash rather than a linked-list for cycle check in cp

"Bo Borgerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi Bo, >> >> Thanks for that patch. >> >> However, let's see if Cai Xianchao and Li Zefan >> are still working on rewriting cp to use openat-style functions. >> >> http:

Re: FYI: 3 small patches

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 8:28 AM: > | Without a guard like this, it is far too easy to apply a patch > | prepared against a preceding release, and not notice that a NEWS > | entry is inserted into the wrong block. > | * maint.mk (sc_immutable_N

[bug #23023] cp -r use a lot of memory, feature or memory leak?

URL: Summary: cp -r use a lot of memory, feature or memory leak? Project: GNU Core Utilities Submitted by: matteo Submitted on: martedì 22/04/2008 alle 22:13 Category: None

[PATCH] Improve memory management in join

Hi, This improves the performance of `join' by reducing memory management overhead and eliminating unnecessary copies for order checking: $ valgrind src/join.master ja jb ==23744== malloc/free: 4,571,152 allocs, 4,571,152 frees, 255,971,774 bytes allocated. $ valgrind src/join ja jb ==23738== ma

Re: [PATCH] Improve memory management in join

"Bo Borgerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This improves the performance of `join' by reducing memory management > overhead and eliminating unnecessary copies for order checking: > > $ valgrind src/join.master ja jb > ==23744== malloc/free: 4,571,152 allocs, 4,571,152 frees, 255,971,774 > bytes al

Re: coreutils-6.11 released

Elbert Pol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I try that build, but is fails now at a earlyer point. Well, your logs show that configure succeeded, which means the failure is _later_. And that means my patch solved the problem. > I attach logs Thank you. The first interesting part is here: In fi

Re: PATH and security

Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering wrote: >> If security isn't enough of an argument, you can consider this yet another >> reason not to put "." early in your PATH. Please consider removing >> "." from your PATH altogether. Yes, that does make for some small amount >> of extr

Re: Bash vs. sh

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jim Meyering wrote: > > as the preferred method for getting started, avoiding the need to check in > > bootstrap? Or even have a two-level bootstrap: ./bootstrap is a simple > > checked-in wrapper which portably calls autom4te on bootstrap_inner.m4sh > > then runs bootstrap_i

Re: retaining AFS-specific nameless group IDs (PAG) in `id' and `groups'

Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since you guys are interested in AFS, I'm hoping one of you will > respond to the above. http://lists.openafs.org/pipermail/openafs-info/2008-April/029132.html > I'll wait a few days, after which, if I don't hear anything, I'll > just revert to the old

cp: preserve existing destination file

Hello, thanks for providing the GNU-system coreutils. Unfortunately, after a new system installation, I just today discovered, that the --reply=foo option in cp has been deprecated and is going to be removed. I often want to do "cp dir1/* dir2", but protect the files already existing in dir2 f

Re: Bash vs. sh

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jim Meyering wrote: > "Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There's already a bootstrap module in gnulib. You mean build-aux/bootstrap? > We sync things around periodically. I was hoping for something more formal: all developers commit their bootstrap-inner.m4sh ch

Re: cp: preserve existing destination file

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Unfortunately, after a new system installation, I just today > discovered, that the --reply=foo option in cp has been deprecated > and is going to be removed. Yes. It didn't do what people thought it did. It was possible to have silent data loss. > I often want to do

Re: PATH and security

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 5:13 PM: |>> If security isn't enough of an argument, you can consider this yet another |>> reason not to put "." early in your PATH. Please consider removing |>> "." from your PATH altogether. | | Besides, I r

Re: Bash vs. sh

"Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> "Joel E. Denny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> There's already a bootstrap module in gnulib. > > You mean build-aux/bootstrap? Yes. >> We sync things around periodically. > > I was hoping for something mor

Re: PATH and security

Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > According to Jim Meyering on 4/22/2008 5:13 PM: > |>> If security isn't enough of an argument, you can consider this yet another > |>> reason not to put "." early in your PATH. Please consider removing > |>> "." from your PATH altogether. > > | Besides, I re