Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 15:20:14 +0200 From: Gordon Bergling <gbe@freebsd.org> To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r364449 - head/bin/ls Message-ID: <20200827132014.GA65182@lion.0xfce3.net> In-Reply-To: <20200825.232147.141648624023404568.hrs@FreeBSD.org> References: <202008210620.07L6KC6M091289@repo.freebsd.org> <20200822.194438.808130473746317382.hrs@FreeBSD.org> <20200824085223.GA28970@lion.0xfce3.net> <20200825.232147.141648624023404568.hrs@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Aug 25, 2020 at 11:21:47PM +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
> Gordon Bergling <gbe@freebsd.org> wrote
> in <20200824085223.GA28970@lion.0xfce3.net>:
>=20
> gb> thanks for your feedback. I can only define POSIX.1-200{1,8} or -susv=
4. So what
> gb> do you think about the following STANDARDS section?
> gb>=20
> gb> For the options that are non-existing I could correct them to -2001 a=
nd mention
> gb> also -susv4.
> gb>=20
> gb> STANDARDS
> gb> With the exception of options -g, -n and -o, the ls utility conf=
orms to
> gb> IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (=E2=80=9CPOSIX.1=E2=80=9D) and Version=C2=
=A04 of the Single UNIX
> gb> Specification (=E2=80=9CSUSv4=E2=80=9D). The options -B, -D, -G=
, -I, -T, -U, -W, -Z, -b,
> gb> -h, -w, -y and -, are compatible extensions not defined in IEEE =
Std
> gb> 1003.1-2001 (=E2=80=9CPOSIX.1=E2=80=9D).
>=20
> It might be a bit tedious, but just adding -2008 looks good to me
> like the following:
>=20
> |.St -p1003.1-2001
> |and
> |.St -p1003.1-2008 .
>=20
> p1003.1-2004 is a subset of SUSv3 (and -2008 is one of SUSv4), so
> using p1003.1-YYYY consistently sounds less confusing when describing
> the conformance within the subsets.
>=20
> Regarding the non-standard extensions, I am not sure what
> "compatible" means. Some of them are extensions commonly seen on
> other BSD-derived OSes, some are available only on FreeBSD, and some
> have the same names with GNU's counterpart but different meanings.
> Is just mentioning "...are non-standard extensions" with no
> specification name sufficient and easier? I have no strong opinion
> on that part, but this is just my two cents.
>=20
> -- Hiroki
I followed your suggestions and created the following differential for
further discussions.
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26210
--Gordon
--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=eXIV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200827132014.GA65182>