From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Feb 20 13:57:04 2010
Return-Path: <owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 34D5F1065679; Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:57:04 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:57:04 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: Ulrich Sp??rlein <uqs@FreeBSD.org>, Xin LI <delphij@FreeBSD.org>,
	src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org,
	svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org
Message-ID: <20100220135704.GA57372@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201002192354.o1JNsCZJ035886@svn.freebsd.org>
	<20100220115838.GB94735@FreeBSD.org>
	<20100220133520.GB57731@acme.spoerlein.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100220133520.GB57731@acme.spoerlein.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: 
Subject: Re: svn commit: r204103 - in head/usr.bin: . seq
X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current
	<svn-src-head.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head>,
	<mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-src-head@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head>,
	<mailto:svn-src-head-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 13:57:04 -0000

On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 02:35:20PM +0100, Ulrich Sp??rlein wrote:
> On Sat, 20.02.2010 at 11:58:38 +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > Why do we need [seq] when we have jot(1)?
> 
> Compatibility with shell scripts, I suppose. Some ports may use seq(1)
> in their test or build targets, etc. There is no jot(1) on any Linux or
> Solaris I've seen so usage of seq(1) is fairly common.

True, jot(1) is BSD specific.  But if we speak for ports, trivial patch
can turn seq(1) expression into jot(1) one, thus getting rid of
gratuitous dependency.

> I wonder though, if we could merge functionality into jot(1) and employ
> a link to seq.

I would probably be OK with the last suggestion.  :-)

./danfe