Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 18 Mar 2012 12:14:41 -0600
From:      Chad Perrin <code@apotheon.net>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: CFT: new BSD-licensed sort available
Message-ID:  <20120318181441.GA7162@hemlock.hydra>
In-Reply-To: <44pqc9vs99.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
References:  <4F60C059.7060904@FreeBSD.org> <44pqcd8yhd.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <CADLo83_r3SgYj6apifN6NTCwZ-ApYbLkyMOS5zcCmTFst_Vcow@mail.gmail.com> <4462e46ul7.fsf@lowell-desk.lan> <031222CBCF33214AB2EB4ABA279428A30107B5E9D2AB@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> <44pqc9vs99.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 11:33:06AM -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
> Oleg Moskalenko <oleg.moskalenko@citrix.com> writes:
> >
> > Yes, indeed, there was an old sort syntax, where they supported it in
> > a form "+POS1 -POS2". It is a non-POSIX obsolete syntax, so we did
> > not implement it in the new BSD sort. I can add it, if necessary.
> 
> If anyone asked for my opinion, I'd say that I'd prefer to see this
> syntax stamped out instead; it's unnecessary, confusing, and has been
> considered obsolete for decades. A quick look over my workstation's
> filesystems shows just a few uses: in texconfig, libtool, something in
> X11/config, maybe a handful more.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best answer is in practice, but I'm willing to
> spend some of my time working on it if that helps.

I suspect the "right" answer for the near future would be to eliminate
dependence on it wherever you can get such changes accepted by upstream,
and support it as a deprecated (perhaps even undocumented) feature in
bsdsort just so it's easier to entirely eliminate any dependence on
gnusort for purposes of backward compatibility.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120318181441.GA7162>