On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 02:09:45PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> > "The output of the cal command is supposed to be bit for bit
> > compatible to the original Unix cal command, because its output is
> > processed by other programs like CGI scripts, that should not be
> > broken."
On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:02:50PM -0600, Aaron Hall wrote:
> It makes cal non-portable if you're post-processing output. BSD cal
> doesn't support -h (nor -C, which accomplishes the same thing).
Hmm, cal shouldn't even accept -C.
> > I'm not saying it shouldn't I just wonder why this is a bug r
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 12:46:57PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> So you're saying cal should check stdout and not use escapes if it is a
> pipe, right? Why's that? YOu can easily remove the highlighting with
> option -h as you did yourself.
It makes cal non-portable if you're post-processing ou
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 12:46:57PM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote:
> So you're saying cal should check stdout and not use escapes if it is a pipe,
> right? Why's that? YOu can easily remove the highlighting with option -h as
> you
> did yourself.
>
> I'm not saying it shouldn't I just wonder why th
So you're saying cal should check stdout and not use escapes if it is a pipe,
right? Why's that? YOu can easily remove the highlighting with option -h as you
did yourself.
I'm not saying it shouldn't I just wonder why this is a bug rather than a
suggestion. Could you point me to some document say
Package: bsdmainutils
Version: 9.0.2
Severity: normal
$ date
Tue Sep 18 20:37:29 PDT 2012
Observe the extra stuff around the 18 in the output below:
$ cal | hexdump -C
20 20 20 53 65 70 74 65 6d 62 65 72 20 32 30 31 | September 201|
0010 32 20 20 20 20 20 0a 53 75 20 4d 6f 20
6 matches
Mail list logo
