Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 18:49:31 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (aka Andrey A. Chernov, Black Mage) <ache@astral.msk.su> To: "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" <kaleb@x.org> Cc: hackers@freefall.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: A couple problems in FreeBSD 2.1.0-950922-SNAP Message-ID: <RkBydWmaeU@ache.dialup.demos.ru> In-Reply-To: <199510161522.LAA07456@exalt.x.org>; from "Kaleb S. KEITHLEY" at Mon, 16 Oct 1995 11:22:53 EST References: <199510161522.LAA07456@exalt.x.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199510161522.LAA07456@exalt.x.org> Kaleb S. KEITHLEY
writes:
>When I say that SVR4 does not consider '\t' to be a blank I am not
>saying that FreeBSD should do the same merely because SVR4 does. What
>I am saying is: if you take iBSC seriously, then you should make isblank,
>in an ISO locale, work the same way that it would work on other systems.
Well, it is a different approach. Since isblank() isn't syscall :-)
IBCS2 stuff takes it from native SVR4 libc, BSD code not used
here at all.
>SunOS, Digital UNIX, and all various versions of SVR4 (Solaris 2,x,
>IRIX 5.x/6.x, NEWS-OS 6.x, and Unixware 2.x) all say '\t' is not blank.
>HPUX-10 and AIX-4 say it is, but they're not contenders for iBSC. Linux
>says it is too, and I would argue that Linux is broken for the same
>reason.
So, if behavior is unclear and no docs exists, lets not change from
one unclear behaviour to another but wait until some specifications
comes on this subj.
--
Andrey A. Chernov : And I rest so composedly, /Now, in my bed,
ache@astral.msk.su : That any beholder /Might fancy me dead -
FidoNet: 2:5020/230.3 : Might start at beholding me, /Thinking me dead.
RELCOM Team,FreeBSD Team : E.A.Poe From "For Annie" 1849
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?RkBydWmaeU>