Re: ash - options to `echo' command

1999-10-22 Thread Gregory T. Norris
Thanx! On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 09:00:46AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/toc.htm

Re: ash - options to `echo' command

1999-10-21 Thread Herbert Xu
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 04:50:38PM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote: > > I'm afraid that I'm not familiar with the SuS. Could you give me a URL > for this? http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/toc.htm -- Debian GNU/Linux 2.1 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ ) Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~}

Re: ash - options to `echo' command

1999-10-21 Thread Gregory T. Norris
On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 02:00:16PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > The change was made in line with the SuS. Note that it is not possible > to write echo statements portably across platforms because of legacy > shells that do support options. That is why it is recommended to use > printf instead of e

Re: ash - options to `echo' command

1999-10-21 Thread Herbert Xu
On Wed, Oct 20, 1999 at 09:27:48PM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote: > I was just curious about why ash's builtin `echo' command no longer > accepts any options? It causes interesting (though generally harmless) > output in a variety of places, because I use ash as /bin/sh. For > example: > >

ash - options to `echo' command

1999-10-21 Thread Gregory T. Norris
I was just curious about why ash's builtin `echo' command no longer accepts any options? It causes interesting (though generally harmless) output in a variety of places, because I use ash as /bin/sh. For example: [EMAIL PROTECTED] grep -l "echo -n" /etc/init.d/* | wc -l 35 I have