"tail +r" not equivalent to "tail + | rev -l" ?

2009-05-25 Thread Cedric Blancher
On 24/05/2009, Roland Mainz wrote: > > Hi! > > > > [The following is either a PSARC or OS/Net gatekeeper question - I don't > know it exactly and therefore both end-up in the CC: field] > During PIT (=PreIntegration Testing) for ksh93-integration update2 > (which includes an opensource

"tail +r" not equivalent to "tail + | rev -l" ?

2009-05-24 Thread Roland Mainz
Hi! [The following is either a PSARC or OS/Net gatekeeper question - I don't know it exactly and therefore both end-up in the CC: field] During PIT (=PreIntegration Testing) for ksh93-integration update2 (which includes an opensource replacement for /usr/bin/tail and /usr/xpg4/bin/tail (not

"tail +r" not equivalent to "tail + | rev -l" ?

2009-05-24 Thread Glenn Fowler
"tail +r" is not accepted by sun /bin/tail you meant "tail +r"? I was trying to reconcile your patch with the sun tail(1) man page too as far as I can tell the only place where ast tail doesn't meet the sun docs is tail -r it currently produces no output the fix I plan is to make this be