Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm beginning to think GNU dd should at least warn about
the portability problem.
Well, the POSIX spec is pretty clear, and the POSIX tradition is that
option order normally should not matter.
But here we're
Olivier Delhomme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Le Wed, 20 Dec 2006 07:52:20 +0800, Dan Jacobson disait :
On both the dd man and Info pages, we see
count=BLOCKS
copy only BLOCKS input blocks
OK, but one must use ones brain, heavens forbid, to figure out that
e.g., these
Olivier Delhomme [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is a patch that may change this.
One more small change:
http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=commit;h=2d4cd377583
(dd invocation): Add to the description of cbs.
diff --git a/doc/coreutils.texi b/doc/coreutils.texi
index
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@item [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@opindex bs
@cindex block size
-Both read and write @var{bytes} bytes at a time. This overrides
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and @samp{obs}.
+Set both input and output block sizes to @var{bytes}.
+This makes @command{dd} read and
Andreas Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
@item [EMAIL PROTECTED]
@opindex bs
@cindex block size
-Both read and write @var{bytes} bytes at a time. This overrides
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and @samp{obs}.
+Set both input and output block sizes to
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andreas Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But only the preceding ones.
True. Thanks.
Wait a minute -- POSIX says bs= should override all ibs= and obs=
operands (not just preceding ones), and traditional dd conforms to
POSIX here. So the GNU
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andreas Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But only the preceding ones.
True. Thanks.
Wait a minute -- POSIX says bs= should override all ibs= and obs=
operands (not just preceding ones), and traditional dd conforms
Jim Meyering wrote:
I see that both freebsd6 and netbsd1.6 disallow the usage in
your test case:
netbsd$ echo x | /bin/dd bs=3 ibs=10 obs=10 conv=sync | wc -c
dd: ibs: illegal argument combination or already set
0
Solaris 10 does what you propose.
Can anyone check other implementations?
Matthew Woehlke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
I see that both freebsd6 and netbsd1.6 disallow the usage in
your test case:
netbsd$ echo x | /bin/dd bs=3 ibs=10 obs=10 conv=sync | wc -c
dd: ibs: illegal argument combination or already set
0
Solaris 10 does what you
Jim Meyering [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm beginning to think GNU dd should at least warn about
the portability problem.
Well, the POSIX spec is pretty clear, and the POSIX tradition is that
option order normally should not matter. Note also that BSD dd
rejects usages like dd ibs=10 bs=3
Jim Meyering wrote:
Matthew Woehlke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jim Meyering wrote:
I see that both freebsd6 and netbsd1.6 disallow the usage in
your test case:
netbsd$ echo x | /bin/dd bs=3 ibs=10 obs=10 conv=sync | wc -c
dd: ibs: illegal argument combination or already set
0
Solaris 10
Matthew Woehlke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
IRIS/IRIX 6.5
Alpha/OSF 4.0F, 4.0G, 5.1
SPARC/Solaris 5.6 - 5.10
x86/Solaris 5.10
PA-RISC/HP-UX 11.00, 11.11
IA64/HP-UX 11.22
PPC/AIX 5.3
Thanks for checking all those. It looks like my guess
was right and all SVR4-derived hosts silently
OD Here is a patch that may change this.
Looks good.
___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
Le Wed, 20 Dec 2006 07:52:20 +0800, Dan Jacobson disait :
On both the dd man and Info pages, we see
count=BLOCKS
copy only BLOCKS input blocks
OK, but one must use ones brain, heavens forbid, to figure out that
e.g., these
bs=BYTES
force
14 matches
Mail list logo
