Re: Patch to check for required programs when building from source checkout

2008-10-22 Thread Pádraig Brady
Eric Blake wrote: > According to Pádraig Brady on 10/21/2008 4:04 PM: >> echo "$ver" | sed ' >> s/^\([0-9]\{,\}\)\.\([0-9]\{,\}\)[.0]*$/\1.\2.0/; #1.10 -> >> 1.10.0 >> s/^\([0-9]\{,\}\)\.\([0-9]\{,\}\)\([a-z]\)/\1.\2.99\3/; #1.10a -> >> 1.10.99a > > For what it's worth

pwd doesn't support -L or -P

2008-10-22 Thread Reuben Thomas
These two switches are necessary for POSIX compatibility. I note that bash's pwd does support them; is the intention that bash's built-in pwd, which does, should fill this gap in a GNU system? -- http://rrt.sc3d.org/ | Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur (Anon) _

Re: pwd doesn't support -L or -P

2008-10-22 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Reuben Thomas on 10/22/2008 6:08 AM: > These two switches are necessary for POSIX compatibility. I note that > bash's pwd does support them; is the intention that bash's built-in pwd, > which does, should fill this gap in a GNU system? It

Re: pwd doesn't support -L or -P

2008-10-22 Thread Reuben Thomas
Here's a suggestion that would be a lot simpler to implement: have pwd implement -P as a no-op, and document the lack of -L, and the conflict with the POSIX default behaviour. I'd be happy to write a documentation patch. That will enlighten users; if anyone cares enough about coreutils's pwd s

Re: Patch to check for required programs when building from source checkout

2008-10-22 Thread Jim Meyering
Pádraig Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > latest version is attached > (minor tweaks compared to previous). > >>From b9e5fe8076e7a55f152e5ffbd841310ba4994838 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: =?utf-8?q?P=C3=A1draig=20Brady?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:40:12 +0100 > Subject:

Re: [PATCH] : ls: clarify documentation of exit statuses

2008-10-22 Thread Jim Meyering
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Good thing I tried to compile before pushing! >> The above lacks \n\ on the "0 if OK" line. > > It's also lacking a close-parenthesis in the text. Also, that wording > is a bit verbose for my taste; the verbosity

Re: [coreutils] coreutils-7.0 expr exposes long-standing bug in matlab startup script

2008-10-22 Thread Martin Knapp-Cordes
Hello, Eric Blake is correct. I glossed over a short paragraph in the Open Group standard doc page for 'expr' at the end of the 'Application Usage' section where there is a statement that permits something like '-1' to look like an option not the integer, '-1'. This means that the MATLAB startup

Re: [coreutils] coreutils-7.0 expr exposes long-standing bug in matlab startup script

2008-10-22 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Martin Knapp-Cordes on 10/22/2008 12:17 PM: > This means that the MATLAB startup shell script is indeed > not Open Group compliant. Obviously, no change will be > necessary to the script if the proposed fixes are approved, > as they appear