On Nov 23, 2007 2:43 AM, Denys Vlasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > b) Why do some utils finish with a (indirect) call to
> > fflush(stdout), and others do not? Wouldn't it be better to
> > call fflush in all utils or call fflush in none?
>
> It allows them to return exit code 1 ("error") if there was
> a problem writing to standard output.
>
> It should be done only in those utilities which primary
> result is stdout output (e.g. cat, sort, sed).
> For example, modprobe does not need to do that.
Would that then be a good argument for adding it to cut, as per my first
post?
Anyway, wow, thanks for the full and speedy reply!
All the best,
===Rich
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
