From owner-freebsd-current Tue Dec 8 02:25:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA09227 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:25:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ren.dtir.qld.gov.au (ns.detir.qld.gov.au [203.46.81.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA09222 for ; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 02:25:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au) Received: by ren.dtir.qld.gov.au; id UAA11323; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:23:53 +1000 (EST) Received: from ogre.dtir.qld.gov.au(167.123.8.3) by ren.dtir.qld.gov.au via smap (3.2) id xma011316; Tue, 8 Dec 98 20:23:44 +1000 Received: from atlas.dtir.qld.gov.au (atlas.dtir.qld.gov.au [167.123.8.9]) by ogre.dtir.qld.gov.au (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA17094; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:23:44 +1000 (EST) Received: from nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au (nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au [167.123.10.10]) by atlas.dtir.qld.gov.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA15800; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:23:44 +1000 (EST) Received: from nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au (localhost.dtir.qld.gov.au [127.0.0.1]) by nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA26960; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 20:23:42 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from syssgm@nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au) Message-Id: <199812081023.UAA26960@nymph.dtir.qld.gov.au> To: Robert Nordier cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, syssgm@dtir.qld.gov.au Subject: Re: strings - elf vs aout References: <199812072002.WAA29135@ceia.nordier.com> In-Reply-To: <199812072002.WAA29135@ceia.nordier.com> from Robert Nordier at "Sat, 07 Dec 1998 22:02:29 +0200" Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 20:23:41 +1000 From: Stephen McKay Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Saturday, 7th December 1998, Robert Nordier wrote: >Nate Williams wrote: >> > > Shall I devise and commit a fix for this behaviour? >> > >> > If you want to do this, I'd suggest making it an option. Current >> > standards, such as the Single UNIX Specification, apparently regard a >> > printable string as 4 or more isprint(3) chars followed by '\n' or >> > '\0'. >> >> Then 'strings' for ELF is broken, since \t is not a newline of end of a >> string, and Steven's comments are valid. Hmm. Strict adherence to this '\n' or '\0' rule would suck a lot. Let's not "fix" that. What idiots wrote this spec? >Reverting to the traditional approach would be a double-step from >strict SUS conformance, as well as a single step away from standard >GNU binutils behavior. It also says "Additional implementation-dependent strings may be written." So I won't feel too bad hardcoding tab. It just sucks too much otherwise. >However, if the consensus is that these issues are of little >importance or relevance, I wouldn't object particularly. I'm going to add '\t' back to strings unless I'm shouted down. But I never get anything done except on weekends, so there's plenty of time to work up a good argument... Stephen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message