Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 12:14:25 -0800 From: "Jin Guojun[VFF]" <jguojun@gmail.com> To: Chris Hill <chris@monochrome.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pwd default behavior Message-ID: <293c194d-8eaa-4887-adf9-9f2c06006a6c@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.20.2602061316270.53186@tripel.monochrome.org> References: <877bsqe6m0.fsf@x1.laptops.machines> <86ms1lbzsd.fsf@ltc.des.dev> <6384c7bf-e66f-4baf-8b23-0e3b16e1a7f9@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.2602061316270.53186@tripel.monochrome.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 2/6/26 10:18, Chris Hill wrote: > On Fri, 6 Feb 2026, Jin Guojun[VFF] wrote: > >> On 2/6/26 08:30, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: >>> Simon Wollwage <rootnode+freebsd@wollwage.com> writes: >>>> While reading the code for /bin/pwd, I noticed that the default >>>> behavior >>>> in the code is to assume -P if no arguments are supplied, but >>>> according >>>> to POSIX it shoud be -L >>>> (https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/utilities/pwd.html) >>>> >>>> Is it for convenience reasons or other technical reasons? Seems >>>> like an >>>> easy change to make it compliant. >>> It makes very little difference in practice as pwd(1) is usually a >>> shell >>> built-in, but: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D55146 >>> >>> DES >> >> It does make some difference because one wants to know where one >> really is at :-) >> >> Since there is another command "dirs" which does "pwd -L", so pwd >> defaulting to -P makes sense to provide the real location. > > `dirs` exists in csh. In my shell, /bin/sh, there is no `dirs` and > `pwd` defaults to the -L behavior. > The man page should be updated to reflect the different behaviors between sh and csh.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?293c194d-8eaa-4887-adf9-9f2c06006a6c>