On 12/15/2015 06:52 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> The attached 2 patches do that, with one being
> an improved syntax check to flag commands like:
> env ... && fails=1
+1
Nice, thanks!
Have a nice day,
Berny
On 13/12/15 20:08, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 10/11/15 07:27, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> On 11/10/2015 12:54 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> For these reasons I might just keep the test cleanups
>>> from my previous patch but continue to build kill by default?
>>
>> +1
>
> Two more patches related to
On 13/12/15 20:29, Leslie S Satenstein wrote:
> man kill shows -l as providing signal names and -L as providing both names
> and numbers either as privileged or regular user (0, or 1000).
>
> I kill -L output returns as expected results if it is root or sudo user.
> Otherwise it returns
>
> b
On 10/11/15 07:27, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 12:54 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> For these reasons I might just keep the test cleanups
>> from my previous patch but continue to build kill by default?
>
> +1
Two more patches related to this attached.
kill: add undocumented -L for comp
On 11/10/2015 07:36 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> I see that there were various issues apart from the texinfo docs
> related to --enable-no-install-program, where tests would depend on
> programs being built. Hopefully that's mostly addressed in the
> attached patch set.
LGTM, thanks!
Have a nice d
On 10/11/15 07:27, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/10/2015 12:54 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> For these reasons I might just keep the test cleanups
>> from my previous patch but continue to build kill by default?
>
> +1
>
>>From a packager's point of view, it's very easy to either use
> --enable-n
On 11/10/2015 12:54 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> For these reasons I might just keep the test cleanups
> from my previous patch but continue to build kill by default?
+1
>From a packager's point of view, it's very easy to either use
--enable-no-install-program=... or simply to remove the binary
and
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> bash-4.4 on Gentoo certainly supports `kill -L`.
> -mike
My apologies; In my haste I forgot to check which version of Bash I was running.
Mike
On 09 Nov 2015 17:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> > I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
> > provided by the shell or util-linux.
> > Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>
> What about non-Linux systems, i.e., where util-linux is not
> a
On 09 Nov 2015 15:34, Mike Hodson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Tomas Nordin wrote:
> > For whatever it's worth:
> >
> > $ uname -a
> > Linux debian 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.68-1+deb7u1 i686 GNU/Linux
>
> It's not just Debian; Sabayon, and as such presumed Gentoo proper,
> bot
On 09/11/15 19:20, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 09/11/15 16:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 09/11/15 16:48, Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
On 09/11/15 16:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I see on mo
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Tomas Nordin wrote:
> For whatever it's worth:
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux debian 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.68-1+deb7u1 i686 GNU/Linux
It's not just Debian; Sabayon, and as such presumed Gentoo proper,
both have a BASH which doesn't include the -L mnemonic, but
For whatever it's worth:
$ uname -a
Linux debian 3.2.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.2.68-1+deb7u1 i686 GNU/Linux
$ which kill
/bin/kill
$ kill -L
bash: kill: L: invalid signal specification
$ /bin/kill -L
1 HUP 2 INT 3 QUIT 4 ILL 5 TRAP 6 ABRT 7 BUS
8 FPE 9 KILL1
2015-11-09 15:27:41 +, Pádraig Brady:
> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
> provided by the shell or util-linux.
> Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>
> We might move 'kill' to the disabled_by_default_progs
> list in build-aux/gen-lists-of-programs.sh,
> but I'm thinking
On 09/11/15 16:58, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 09/11/15 16:48, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> On 09/11/15 16:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
> prov
On 09/11/15 16:48, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> On 09/11/15 16:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>>> On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
provided by the shell or util-linux.
Should we
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 09/11/15 16:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>>> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
>>> provided by the shell or util-linux.
>>> Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>>
>> What abo
On 11/09/2015 09:14 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I would be inclined to retain it one way or the other, since some people
>> surely require it, either because they choose not to, or simply
>> cannot, install an alternate package that provides it.
>
> Maybe. It would be good to see example though.
On 09/11/15 15:53, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
>> provided by the shell or util-linux.
>> Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>>
>> We might move 'kill' to the disabled_by_default_progs
>> list i
On 09/11/15 16:02, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
> On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
>> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
>> provided by the shell or util-linux.
>> Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>
> What about non-Linux systems, i.e., where util-linux is not
> availab
On 11/09/2015 04:27 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
provided by the shell or util-linux.
Should we just remove it from coreutils?
What about non-Linux systems, i.e., where util-linux is not
available? I personally don't have such a system, but I think
G
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
> provided by the shell or util-linux.
> Should we just remove it from coreutils?
>
> We might move 'kill' to the disabled_by_default_progs
> list in build-aux/gen-lists-of-programs.sh,
> but I'm
I see on most GNU/Linux distros that kill(1) is
provided by the shell or util-linux.
Should we just remove it from coreutils?
We might move 'kill' to the disabled_by_default_progs
list in build-aux/gen-lists-of-programs.sh,
but I'm thinking we should do like we did with su
and just remove it?
Wha
23 matches
Mail list logo