Warning! autoconf can generate very long lines in Makefiles

2005-09-29 Thread Jim Meyering
coreutils' Makefiles are currently created using automake-1.9.6 and autoconf-2.59c There are some very long lines in the Makefiles generated for upcoming coreutils-5.90. Here's an example: LIBOBJS = ${LIBOBJDIR}backupfile$U.o ${LIBOBJDIR}basename$U.o ... The LTLIBOBJS definition had the

FYI: settime.c doesn't compile on OSF1 V5.1 due to stime

2005-09-29 Thread Jim Meyering
Here's the work-around I'm using: 2005-09-29 Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] * settime.c (settime): Move the HAVE_STIME block `up' into an #elif block, so that we don't even try to compile it if settimeofday is available. This works around a compilation failure on OSF1

Re: Re2: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread Bob Proulx
Jim Meyering wrote: I've added this: stat now exits nonzero if a file operand does not exist Very good! Thanks Bob ___ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

Re3: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread ThMO
Hello Paul, Bob and others listening, · even though the C compiler might be able to deal with 64-bit integer values, this must *not* be the case with the C pre-processor: #define ULLONG_MAX 18446744073709551615ULL the C compiler (gcc v2.7.2.1) *is* able to deal with that

Re: Re3: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
ThMO [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: the header file xtime.h defines: # if HAVE_LONG_LONG typedef long long int xtime_t; # define XTIME_PRECISION 10LL # else ... #endif Again cpp groks about the `LL' modifier. Thanks for catching that portability problem to GCC 2.7.2.1.

coreutils man pages info sort - info coreutils sort

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
ThMO [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The neccessary parameter is: --info-page=coreutils $* That way the man-page clearly state the command to type as: info coreutils cmd without the need to name each command inside the info/dir file explicitely. Thanks for the suggestion. So, I take it that

Re: FYI: settime.c doesn't compile on OSF1 V5.1 due to stime

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: +#elif HAVE_STIME + { +/* This fails to compile on OSF1 V5.1, due to stime requiring + a `long int*' and tv_sec is `int'. But that system does provide + settimeofday. */ +int r = stime (ts-tv_sec); +if (r == 0 || errno ==

Re: FYI: settime.c doesn't compile on OSF1 V5.1 due to stime

2005-09-29 Thread Jim Meyering
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That can't work, as it has unbalanced {. Also, it's probably better Thanks for catching that. BTW, do you know what (if any) system ends up using that HAVE_STIME block? I did run test builds on lots of systems, and none failed. just to return whatever

Re: coreutils man pages info sort - info coreutils sort

2005-09-29 Thread Jim Meyering
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ThMO [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The neccessary parameter is: --info-page=coreutils $* That way the man-page clearly state the command to type as: info coreutils cmd without the need to name each command inside the info/dir file explicitely. Thanks for

Re4: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread ThMO
Hello Paul, the header file xtime.h defines: # if HAVE_LONG_LONG typedef long long int xtime_t; # define XTIME_PRECISION 10LL # else ... #endif Again cpp groks about the `LL' modifier. Thanks for catching that portability problem to GCC 2.7.2.1. Please

Re: coreutils man pages info sort - info coreutils sort

2005-09-29 Thread ThMO
Hello Jim, Paul and others listening, [...] Jim, what do you think? We've been around the block a few times with Debian, trying to do just that, but there's at least one problem: `info coreutils pr' would display the `printing text' section of the manual, not the one on `pr

Re: coreutils man pages info sort - info coreutils sort

2005-09-29 Thread ThMO
Hello Paul and others listening, The neccessary parameter is: --info-page=coreutils $* That way the man-page clearly state the command to type as: info coreutils cmd without the need to name each command inside the info/dir file explicitely. Thanks for the suggestion. So, I take it

pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
I'm pondering about implementing pkill like functionality in kill, instead of introducing a new command specific for the purpose. My idea is basicly to make `kill' accept a name instead of just a pid, so the command would look something like: kill [-s SIG | -SIGNAL] PID | NAME Personally, I

Re: Re3: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
ThMO [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: · lib/getdate.y: I'm using bison v1.28 - and for me it's unacceptable, that this grammar can't be processed corrrectly with this older version, You shouldn't need to process it at all, since getdate.c is present in the source distribution. Perhaps the

Re: pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
Alfred M\. Szmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: kill [-s SIG | -SIGNAL] PID | NAME Personally, I think this makes more sense than introducing pkill (or for that matter, killall). And is cleaner. What do people think about this? Most people use the builtin kill command of the shell, so you'll

Re: FYI: settime.c doesn't compile on OSF1 V5.1 due to stime

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [OSF1] does have options to switch between 32 and 64-bit modes, but I didn't think it'd be worthwhile, for code that might never be used. Yes, but I'm more worried about date, ls, etc. These all use time_t, and if OSF1 can be cajoled into using 64-bit

Re: Re4: coreutils v5.2.1 - stat.c

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
ThMO [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I do have a shorter patch for you: ... -# define XTIME_PRECISION 10LL +# define XTIME_PRECISION 10L Thanks, but if XTIME_PRECISION can't be of the correct type, I'd rather just make it 'int' on all platforms and be done with it. With both

Re: pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Eric Blake
Most people use the builtin kill command of the shell, so you'll have to change Bash as well as coreutils. I wish that bash would remove all those builtins, or only use them if a such a builtin doesn't exist on the system. bash has the enable builtin which lets you disable builtins:

Re: pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
Remember, POSIX requires kill(1) to be a shell builtin, because it must support job syntax (kill %1, for example), which cannot be done with normal POSIX child process semantics. In that case, one can make the builtin kill a wrapper, that parses the command line, and if it see %1 it

Re: pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Andreas Schwab
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Blake) writes: Remember, POSIX requires kill(1) to be a shell builtin, because it must support job syntax (kill %1, for example), which cannot be done with normal POSIX child process semantics. In that case, one can make the builtin kill a wrapper, that

Re: pkill

2005-09-29 Thread Alfred M\. Szmidt
Write your own shell function that does just that. Nice, but I'd rather have it default in bash. Might just patch that horrid beast... True. But in this case, it doesn't make it wrong, either. Another argument for making kill a builtin is if you hit your ulimit on max processes,

Re: coreutils-5.90 released

2005-09-29 Thread Eric Blake
There have been many changes since the last release (unstable 5.3.0). So many that I feel 5.90 should also be considered unstable, at least initially. Minor nit during compilation on cygwin: make[3]: Entering directory `/home/eblake/coreutils-5.90/src' if gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I..

Re: coreutils-5.90 released

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Eggert
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Blake) writes: dd.c:1661: warning: long unsigned int format, size_t arg (arg 5) Thanks; I installed this patch. Jim -- I'm not sure what version number you want at the top of ChangeLog so I left it out for now. 2005-09-29 Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] *