On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:33 +0000, James Youngman wrote: > If you can rely enough on the platform being POSIX-conforming for -P > to work, then why not just use Perl's POSIX module?
On some embedded systems where the rootfs is in a ramdisk I use, for example, microperl. This is an amazingly flexible and powerful scripting language with a very small footprint, BUT it contains no Perl modules whatsoever. Some of these systems use busybox pwd but not all. And of course there are other scripting languages that would like to invoke pwd that don't have their own built-in modules. Even just writing a portable sh script isn't easy since POSIX-compliant sh's are not required to have a built-in pwd. I should admit that regardless of how this turns out I'll have to take defensive measures since any change in coreutils, even if made today, can't be relied upon "in the wild" for many years to come. Still, we should DTRT where possible. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.mad-scientist.us "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
