On 8/20/19 4:44 PM, enh wrote: >> Seriously,that's what LOCALE=C _should_ emit. :P > > agreed. (we used to joke that en_NJ [for New Jersey] should do this.) > > but forcing the locale to en_US.utf8 is good enough for our testing > purposes, with the exception of [rare] cases like this where the > strings differ slightly.
Assuming en_US.utf8 is installed on the machine, but yeah we can spec that as a prerequisite for running the test suite. >>> though it's definitely unfortunate that there are a few BSD/GNU >>> wording differences. >> >> And probably musl in there too (which is increasingly important in the >> docker/container world; alpine's their default "small" distro)... > > i'd assume musl just copied glibc's strings? https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/errno/__strerror.h >>> (my specific worry in this case is that i assume that eventually >>> DIRTREE_STATLESS will return errno in struct dirtree because other >>> potential users -- like ls(1) -- want more control, at which point >>> find(1) will likely be in charge of reporting its own errors based on >>> dirtree errno values rather than necessarily the thread-local errno. >> >> I'd make that its own flag, and let's burn that bridge when we come to it. >> >> But tell me more about this use case? Why does ls need more control of its >> error >> messages? (I believe you, I just want to understand the goal you're trying to >> achieve here.) > > i haven't actually tried to write this yet, so i reserve the right to > be wrong, but ... i think that ls cares about the difference between > stuff like EPERM/EACCES (where it should just do the whole ??? thing > we've seen the GNU one do) and anything else, where it should just > report the error. Oh, I reproduced a directory full of ??? output: chmod 444 dirname: $ ls dirtest -l ls: cannot access 'dirtest/three': Permission denied ls: cannot access 'dirtest/one': Permission denied ls: cannot access 'dirtest/two': Permission denied total 0 -????????? ? ? ? ? ? one -????????? ? ? ? ? ? three -????????? ? ? ? ? ? two $ ./toybox ls -l dirtest ls: dirtest/three: Permission denied ls: dirtest/one: Permission denied ls: dirtest/two: Permission denied total 0 I'm not sure we're worse? $ ./toybox ls dirtest ls: dirtest/three: Permission denied ls: dirtest/one: Permission denied ls: dirtest/two: Permission denied $ ls dirtest ls: cannot access 'dirtest/three': Permission denied ls: cannot access 'dirtest/one': Permission denied ls: cannot access 'dirtest/two': Permission denied one three two But that _is_ worse. Hmmm. Possibly it should produce the -????????? output without the "permission denied" messages for -l, and just produce the filenames for ls. (And then append an ? for ls -F which the other one doesn't do but... :) Wouldn't it be nice if the posix committee still functioned? I hope its Jorg Schilling problem clears up someday. In the meantime we soldier on ignoring them... >> I've had error_msg() so multiple toybox commands produce a consistent error >> format, and it intentionally defers to libc for what the error message >> should be >> in the local language. But an environment variable so it can spit out the >> macro >> names for testing would be REALLY NICE. I very vaguely remember reading >> something about the ability to make it do that that years ago, but have no >> idea >> where or which "it" this was referring to... > > definitely haven't seen anything like that myself. It was back in college, so quite possibly SunOS had a way to do that. Rob _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net