Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 11:36:08 -0400 From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@csail.mit.edu> To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org, juli@clockworksquid.com Subject: Re: Shouldn't cat(1) use the C locale? Message-ID: <18945.44648.875780.605560@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <200905060831.n468VcRE018431@lurza.secnetix.de> References: <eaa228be0904301148r798e0350k7653aa2d9c3e3dd6@mail.gmail.com> <200905060831.n468VcRE018431@lurza.secnetix.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Wed, 6 May 2009 10:31:38 +0200 (CEST), Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> said: > I think this is a bug in the manual page. When cat(1) is > using the current locale, that's perfectly correct behaviour > in a world that is clearly moving away from ASCII, towards > unicode. Maybe your part of the world.... > So I think the manual page should be fixed so it says that > the -v option handles non-printing characters in the current > locale, and cat needs to be fixed to handle multibyte chars > correctly if the -v option is used with a UTF locale. This is a Bad Idea. cat -v ought to work properly when the input does not consist of "characters" at all. -GAWollman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?18945.44648.875780.605560>