From owner-freebsd-bugs Tue Aug 20 16:21:26 1996 Return-Path: owner-bugs Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA11810 for bugs-outgoing; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 16:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de [141.76.1.11]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA11801 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 16:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sax.sax.de (sax.sax.de [193.175.26.33]) by irz301.inf.tu-dresden.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with ESMTP id BAA21876; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 01:21:20 +0200 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sax.sax.de (8.6.12/8.6.12-s1) with UUCP id BAA22564; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 01:21:19 +0200 Received: (from j@localhost) by uriah.heep.sax.de (8.7.5/8.6.9) id XAA18301; Tue, 20 Aug 1996 23:07:02 +0200 (MET DST) From: J Wunsch Message-Id: <199608202107.XAA18301@uriah.heep.sax.de> Subject: Re: /usr/bin/sort is broken To: rab@cdrom.com (Robert A. Bruce) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 23:07:02 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: bugs@freebsd.org Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) In-Reply-To: <199608201629.JAA12110@wc.cdrom.com> from "Robert A. Bruce" at "Aug 20, 96 09:29:52 am" X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL17 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-bugs@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk As Robert A. Bruce wrote: > Hi Jordan, > /usr/bin/sort is broken on mother. I renamed it to /usr/bin/sort.broken > and copied over a copy of sort from FreeBSD 2.1, which seems to work fine. > I figured I should let you know, so we don't send out FreeBSD 2.2 with > a broken utility. > > Here is an example: > > /usr/bin/sort.broken +0.5 -0.12 << EOF > 5 1401 > 30 30311 > 150 721 > 187 1241 > 215 606 > EOF Please, submit a PR for it (simply call ``send-pr''), so it won't get lost. It would be good if you could also try the same with the Posix options to specify the sorting fields, as opposed to your usage of what Posix calls ``obsolescent'' options (-k vs. +/-). Just mention the results of both tests in the PR. -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)