On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 01:09:20PM -0800, David Rothenberger wrote:
> Does this patch (or a modified version that conforms to POSIX) stand a
> chance of being accepted?
There's a problem with including this in the mainstream version: if we
don't turn //some/path into /some/path, it won't match a
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 01:09:20PM -0800, David Rothenberger wrote:
> Unfortunately, it doesn't fully conform to the POSIX specification because
> it also translates '///' to '//' instead of '/' as required.
An easy fix for that is to change your newly added "if" to this:
if (*f
