en I suggest
> adding the linux specific fallocate util to util-linux-ng,
> and we'll add the more generic `truncate --allocate`
> (or separate command) to coreutils.
So.. what is our final conclusion? The Linux specific fallocate(1) in
util-linux-ng, right? Everyone agrees?
Karel
--
Karel Zak
m name to the list)
> documentation update (both man/arch.x and coreutils.texi)
> new files, src/uname.h, uname-arch.c
> {man,src}/Makefile.am
>
> and for extra credit, also add a test script named, say, tests/misc/arch
> comparing its output with e.g., that from uname
: Add arch.
* man/arch.x: New file.
* man/Makefile.am (dist_man_MANS): Add arch.1.
(arch.1): New dependency.
* tests/misc/arch: New test, compare "arch" with "uname -m"
Signed-off-by: Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
AUTHORS|3 +-
ChangeLog | 14
ers/distributors.
> I'm not too interested in making arch compatible with the Solaris one,
I agree :-)
> so there should probably be some fail-safe to force installation of
> "arch" on a Solaris system. The goal was simply to pull in the one
> from the util-lin
eutils already decides by default to omit.
is there any final decision? I'd like to freeze util-linux-ng code in
next few weeks.
We can also postpone this issue ;-( There is no problem to keep the old
arch command in util-linux for the next release.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMA
On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 04:05:46PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:45:09PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> I hate to say it, after Karel has done most of the work, but I suppose
> >> simply not
licate effort (scm, mailing list,
build-system ...), you can also maintain the utils in util-linux-ng
:-) It's very easy with distributed SCM.
My $0.02...
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
this a good decision.
> Currently my scripts depend on coreutils which would not be appropriate
> for util-linux-ng components, so they would be rewritten in C
> (which would be good for other reasons).
I'd like to see scriptreplay.pl in C too. The dependence on Perl is
painful.
have added note to the man page as well as
warning to the code.
Karel
>From 3e5c0a2db233b726ca80d37aad9eeca8bae144d4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Karel Zak
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 11:32:58 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] su: ignore --preserve-environment, it's mutually exclusive to
--logi
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:55:10AM +0200, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> As the change was in su-common.c, this also affects runuser.
> I think this should then be documented in runuser.1, too, right?
Good point, fixed.
Karel
--
Karel Zak
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
Linux-specific feature in
util-linux. We should discuss such changes early next time ;-)
Thanks for CC:
Karel
--
Karel Zak
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
clusion will be that mv(1) is
a bad choice :-)
> I'm currently only 20:80 for adding it to mv(1).
I think the functionality will be lost in the mv(1) for many users.
Karel
--
Karel Zak
http://karelzak.blogspot.com
12 matches
Mail list logo
