On Thursday 22 November 2007 20:42, Richard Hoyle wrote:
> 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?
Added that, and fixed "cut -f2 - FILE" handling (was ignoring FILE).
--
vda
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
