Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
> > Paul Eggert wrote:
> >> So, under your interpretation, "expr 010" would print 8, but "expr 010
> >> + 0" would print 10? That doesn't sound right to me.
> >
> > My question was why couldn't a conforming implementation interpret 010
> > as octal and th
Hi,
While writing patches to an embedded (BusyBox) version of `id' I noticed
an interesting question about the `return value' that coreutils is using
when we have an invalid group (say, an inexistent primary group) for the
specified or current user. Reading the XCU I noticed it doesn't specify
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are asking for a program that randomly permutes its input. Then
> let's design another program to do that, and not get bogged down
> with how its features work together with "sort"'s existing zoo of
> options.
That might be the best thing: create a new
Thomas Habets <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Once upon a midnight dreary, Paul Eggert pondered, weak and weary:
>> > Or should a random permutation merge all equal values?
>> Only if the ordinary sort would merge the equal values (i.e., if the
>> -u option is specified).
>
> I mean merge them, then
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
> Note that I am not trying to change the behavior of expr but only to
> understand what the standard allows for its behavior.
Ah, sorry, I thought you wanted us to extend "expr".
> How can clarifying the standard to more strongly say that arguments
> are i
Bert Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is probably not a bug, but you might be interested anyway. Running
> `make check' after building coreutils-5.2.1 I get a failed test for rm.
Odd; "make check" works for me with coreutils-5.2.1 on Solaris 9 (sparc).
Can you please try running the fol
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
>> So, under your interpretation, "expr 010" would print 8, but "expr 010
>> + 0" would print 10? That doesn't sound right to me.
>
> My question was why couldn't a conforming implementation interpret 010
> as octal and therefore print a
Paul Eggert wrote:
> Bob Proulx writes:
> > integer
> > An argument consisting only of an (optional) unary minus followed by
> > digits.
>
> It also says, for example:
> expr1 + expr2 Addition of decimal integer-valued arguments.
Hmm... Yes, but it could also be read that only decimal
in
It is probably not a bug, but you might be interested anyway. Running
`make check' after building coreutils-5.2.1 I get a failed test for rm.
Here is some output:
,[ make check ]
| make check-TESTS
| make[1]: Entering directory `/home/fischer/tmp/coreutils-5.2.1/tests/rm'
| PASS: dir-no-w
|
