Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 14:52:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "David E. Cross" <crossd@cs.rpi.edu> To: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Cc: Joe Moss <jmoss@ichips.intel.com>, chet@po.cwru.edu, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 'bug' in /bin/sh's builtin 'echo' Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95.980915144632.24623B-100000@eggbeater.cs.rpi.edu> In-Reply-To: <19980915194623.A7225@cons.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Martin Cracauer wrote: > This one doesn't specify a -e option (in fact it specifies that echo > should take no options at all), everything behaves as if -e was > specified and all switches are echoed. I can hardly accept that as > something to follow. With '\c', you don't need '-n' any more. This is already the way our own /bin/echo works, and that has not seemed to have broken anything. It also has the support of a 'standard', and most (all?) of the commercial UNIX providers following it (anyone want to try on HP-UX and OSF/Digital UNIX?). The change to make is *trivial*, in the 'builtin' echo.c in sh you need to uncomment the line "#define eflag 1" (on a side note, our 'ls' does not support the '-n' flag; this would be me volenteering to fix if no one else is interested in doing so) -- David Cross To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.95.980915144632.24623B-100000>