Re: awk in OpenBSD

2017-10-18 Thread Adam Steen
I would guess the latest update Dec, 2012, doesn't off any worth upgrading for, [1] Dec 20, 2012: fiddled makefile to get correct yacc and bison flags. pick yacc (linux) or bison (mac) as necessary. added __attribute__((__noreturn__)) to a couple of lines in proto.h, to silence someone's enthusias

Re: awk in OpenBSD

2017-10-18 Thread Theo de Raadt
i'm watching a bunch of losers who argue before running diff > You didn't really make a great case for the newer awk, either. Is there a > good reason to use the 2012 release from upstream? If so, you could submit > a diff and explain the benefits. > > On Oct 19, 2017 12:15 AM, "Niels Kobschaet

Re: awk in OpenBSD

2017-10-18 Thread Ax0n
You didn't really make a great case for the newer awk, either. Is there a good reason to use the 2012 release from upstream? If so, you could submit a diff and explain the benefits. On Oct 19, 2017 12:15 AM, "Niels Kobschaetzki" wrote: > On 19. Oct 2017, at 06:23, flipchan wrote: > > Yeah blin

Re: awk in OpenBSD

2017-10-18 Thread Niels Kobschaetzki
> On 19. Oct 2017, at 06:23, flipchan wrote: > > Yeah blindly follow the flow of the others , DONT THINK SO That doesn’t explain the reasoning WHY the newer awk is not used. >> On October 19, 2017 4:25:09 AM GMT+02:00, Andras Farkas >> wrote: >> On the 6.2 release page, and confirmed in the

Re: awk in OpenBSD

2017-10-18 Thread flipchan
Yeah blindly follow the flow of the others , DONT THINK SO On October 19, 2017 4:25:09 AM GMT+02:00, Andras Farkas wrote: >On the 6.2 release page, and confirmed in the source code, one can see >The system includes the following major components from outside >suppliers: >Awk Aug 10, 2011 version