Albert Cahalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> begin quote ---
> XBD ERN 16 Utilities that have extensions violating the Utility Syntax
> Guidelines Accept as marked.
>
> It was agreed that an interpretation be made , that the standard
> is clear and no change is required.
On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 13:57, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Albert Cahalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > It's no more legal or illegal than "head -42 foo".
>
> "head -42 foo" is explicitly disallowed by the guidelines.
> "head --lines 42 foo" is not. But we're veering from the main point.
>
> > I'm b
On Thu, 2004-08-26 at 19:28 +0200, Dr. Giovanni A. Orlando wrote:
> Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Will someone implement this feature ?
>
> Today, I start to implement, and see that on rpm-based distro,
> likes: RedHat, Yellowdog, FTOSX, etc
> haves the file, "/etc/'distro-name'-
Tobias Burnus wrote:
Hi,
Will someone implement this feature ?
Today, I start to implement, and see that on rpm-based distro,
likes: RedHat, Yellowdog, FTOSX, etc
haves the file, "/etc/'distro-name'-release that may be got from rpm
commands.
I also note that generally, all these dist
Joshua McClintock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I cannot stat the file, it says it doesn't exist. I cannot rm -rf the
> directory it's in because it says the directory isn't empty. Unlink
> doesn't work either.
>
> Anyone have any ideas?
Looks like the filesystem is somehow corrupted. Try runn
