On 30 August 2013 06:08, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 04:15:28 +0200 Cedric Blancher wrote: >> On 30 August 2013 04:11, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 04:02:24 +0200 Cedric Blancher wrote: >> >> On 30 August 2013 03:59, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 01:15:30 +0200 Roland Mainz wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 7:45 PM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release >> >> >> > has been posted to the download site >> >> >> > http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/ >> >> >> > the package names and md5 checksums are >> >> >> > INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8 >> >> >> > ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c >> >> >> > ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c >> >> >> > the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page >> >> > >> >> > well that RELEASE note was optimistic >> >> > >> >> > I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been >> >> > fts-ized yet >> >> > it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api >> > >> >> 1. We are in alpha mode, right? >> >> 2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the >> >> crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their >> >> chances? :) >> > >> > there's more work involved than fts-izing >> > and there is nothing worse than a busted ls >> > if a builtin ls screws up it takes the shell with it >> > so no quick fix here > >> That's what alpha's are for. Or add a SHOPT_LSBUILTIN for the more >> (willingly) risk-taking audience. > >> That's reminds me to renew Lionel's SHOPT_EXPERIMENTAL proposal so >> that new or potentially risky features can be moved earlier into the >> source than you currently do it. Not all here agree with the current >> snail's pace of development. > > I can't in good conscience put in anything I know doesn't work > especially things that are in the inner loop of the build process > you really want half-assed code in alphas?
If its less bad then cd -@ .; cd .. then add it. If it's worse don't. On 2nd thought - the broken cd -@ .;cd .. can't be topped. Ced -- Cedric Blancher <[email protected]> Institute Pasteur _______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
