The response is unsatisfactory.

First of all, the mention of the "printf" command only mentions its use
for control characters and newlines.  It does not mention the use of
printf if you want to print something like '-n'.   So, no available
documentation actually mentions the problem I reported.

While someone could perhaps deduce the problem (from the nonexistance
of '--'), it seems like it is perhaps worth a few extra words in the
documentation.    If anyone uses /bin/echo and doesn't realize
the possibility of a problem, he or she can be stuck with
a rather annoying silent, intermittent, data-dependent problem.

And, the bug report was specifically indended for /bin/echo,
not for the echo built into the shell.

Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
This is an automatic notification regarding your Bug report
#303719: /bin/echo: echo: documentation is missing a cross-reference,
which was filed against the coreutils package.

It has been closed by one of the developers, namely
Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.

Their explanation is attached below.  If this explanation is
unsatisfactory and you have not received a better one in a separate
message then please contact the developer, by replying to this email.

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

Received: (at 303719-done) by bugs.debian.org; 23 Dec 2005 14:07:02 +0000
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 23 06:07:01 2005
Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Received: from mailservice.tudelft.nl ([130.161.131.5])
        by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
        id 1EpnZV-0002IK-OU
        for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 06:07:01 -0800
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by rav.antivirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A16480223
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:06:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from 82-171-132-56.dsl.ip.tiscali.nl (x084.decis.nl [130.161.177.84])
        by mx4.tudelft.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F6C480208
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:06:30 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by 82-171-132-56.dsl.ip.tiscali.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5862ABFA67
        for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:06:26 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:06:25 +0100
From: Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051013)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Done
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at tudelft.nl
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,ONEWORD autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02


Echo can give unexpected results because the first argument
can be interpreted either as an option or a thing to echo.
The package maintainer says "use prinf instead",
as a work-around.
=20
That information ought to be in echo's man page,
at least in the "See Also" section, if not in the
"Bugs" section.



There are two tricky things about "echo".  The first is this:

       NOTE:  your  shell  may  have  its  own  version of
       echo, which usually supersedes the version described
       here.  Please refer to your shell=92s documentation
       for details about the options it supports.

[from echo(1)].  The second is this:

     Options must precede operands, and the normally-special
    argument `--' has no special meaning and is treated like any other
    STRING.

[from the info node].

Both are already documented.  The printf alternative is also mentioned
on the info page:

    Portable programs can use
    the `printf' command if they need to omit trailing newlines or output
    control characters or backslashes.  *Note printf invocation::.

--=20
Thomas Hood



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to