Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:05:26 -0800 From: Isaac Dunham <idunham@...abit.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: compatability: heirloom-utils +.5, libarchive -1 On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 18:38:08 +0100 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net> wrote: > i had to fix things in heirloom to be able to compile > it with pcc+musl > i did about the same hacks, but then i ran various tests > and some of the more obscure tools failed so i figured > heirloom is not that good quality, eg.: > nl -b a -v 0 > (i would never use nl but it turns out the build > script mess of dash does ..for whatever reason) heirloom toolchest has about four "personalities": 1. SVRx (default?) 2. BSD 3. Single UNIX 3 4. SUS (The latter two are variants of POSIX) In general, the POSIX variants are about as close to precisely standards-conformant as you can get; unfortunately, the plain old UNIX versions are default. I note, though, that nl presumably ought to start numbering at 0 when specified; instead, it starts at 1 (SU3/SUS variants), skipping the line that would be numbered 0. The old unix version apparently didn't recognize -b. But I figure it beats Busybox any day--and I'd rather not use GNU bloat. I'd rather use mksh/ksh93, but if you want a POSIX shell, the Bourne shell beats dash on standards-conformance (after all, it *is* the standard). mksh (when invoked as sh) is almost pure POSIX. Isaac
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.