A NOTE has been added to this issue. ====================================================================== https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1538 ====================================================================== Reported By: andras_farkas Assigned To: ====================================================================== Project: 1003.1(2016/18)/Issue7+TC2 Issue ID: 1538 Category: Shell and Utilities Type: Error Severity: Editorial Priority: normal Status: Interpretation Required Name: Andras Farkas Organization: User Reference: Section: what Page Number: 3437 Line Number: 116041 Interp Status: Pending Final Accepted Text: https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1538#c5675 ====================================================================== Date Submitted: 2021-12-05 06:48 UTC Last Modified: 2022-02-18 19:27 UTC ====================================================================== Summary: what -s is poorly described, uses the word "quit" ======================================================================
---------------------------------------------------------------------- (0005688) kre (reporter) - 2022-02-18 19:27 https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1538#c5688 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Also re https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1538#c5681 The problem with multiple @(#) strings in one line should be dealt with in a separate bug so that it can have its own interpretation response. Andras already did that, so whatever is needed, can happen, but I doubt that an interpretation is needed for that one, no more than it is for changing the wording from "quit" to "skip to the next" or whatever it ends up saying. Those are just clarifying what was always intended, how the implementations actually work, but wasn't stated clearly. What needed the interpretation (as much as I understand the processing requirements here, which isn't much) was the change from the explicit (but wrong) text in the old standard requiring the file name to be printed again and again for each id string printed. That's where the standard was clear, but incorrect - that's where (or at least one case of) an interpretation is needed ... not just clarifying the text to say what it should always have said, but didn't bother to say clearly. Issue History Date Modified Username Field Change ====================================================================== 2021-12-05 06:48 andras_farkas New Issue 2021-12-05 06:48 andras_farkas Name => Andras Farkas 2021-12-05 06:48 andras_farkas Section => what 2022-02-17 09:02 Don Cragun Page Number => 3437 2022-02-17 09:02 Don Cragun Line Number => 116041 2022-02-17 09:02 Don Cragun Interp Status => --- 2022-02-17 15:57 geoffclare Note Added: 0005674 2022-02-17 17:00 geoffclare Note Added: 0005675 2022-02-17 17:02 geoffclare Final Accepted Text => https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1538#c5675 2022-02-17 17:02 geoffclare Status New => Interpretation Required 2022-02-17 17:02 geoffclare Resolution Open => Accepted As Marked 2022-02-17 17:03 geoffclare Interp Status --- => Pending 2022-02-17 17:03 geoffclare Tag Attached: tc3-2008 2022-02-18 09:14 kre Note Added: 0005680 2022-02-18 09:39 geoffclare Note Added: 0005681 2022-02-18 14:39 andras_farkas Note Added: 0005682 2022-02-18 15:07 andras_farkas Note Added: 0005683 2022-02-18 19:20 kre Note Added: 0005687 2022-02-18 19:27 kre Note Added: 0005688 ======================================================================
