Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > can anyone confirm this ? on my systems (tested Gentoo and Fedora) with > glibc-2.5, the example file is not sorted properly while on systems running > glibc-2.4, it is sorted properly ... coreutil-5.97 through coreutils-6.7 (and > cvs) seem to show the same behavior > > $ cat sortme > /dev udev tmpfs rw,nosuid > /dev/shm none tmpfs rw > / /dev/root reiserfs rw,noatime > /dev/pts devpts devpts rw,nosuid,noexec > > [ works ] > $ /lib/libc.so.6 | head -n 1 > GNU C Library development release version 2.4, by Roland McGrath et al. > $ sort sortme > / /dev/root reiserfs rw,noatime > /dev udev tmpfs rw,nosuid > /dev/pts devpts devpts rw,nosuid,noexec > /dev/shm none tmpfs rw > > [ fails ] > $ /lib/libc.so.6 | head -n 1 > GNU C Library stable release version 2.5, by Roland McGrath et al. > /dev/pts devpts devpts rw,nosuid,noexec > / /dev/root reiserfs rw,noatime > /dev/shm none tmpfs rw > /dev udev tmpfs rw,nosuid
Since you don't mention locale, nor show it in the sole sort command you used, I have to ask: Are you sure you're using the same locale in each case? What happens when you use this command? env LC_ALL=C sort sortme Probably doesn't matter, but the second bit of sort output above does not show the sort command you used. BTW, I confirmed that the latest version of sort works fine for your data with glibc-2.5.90: $ LC_ALL=C /bin/sort in / /dev/root reiserfs rw,noatime /dev udev tmpfs rw,nosuid /dev/pts devpts devpts rw,nosuid,noexec /dev/shm none tmpfs rw _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
