Hi Rob, Thanks for taking a look at some of my reports ...
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 11 November 2008 16:14:19 Philip Guo wrote: > > I've just reported (in http://busybox.net/bugs/) 17 behavioral > mismatches > > between busybox and GNU coreutils versions of utilities. You can search > > for them under reporter name 'pgbovine'. > > Coreutils is not a standard, thus a mismatch with coreutils is not > necessarily > a bug. We use susv3 as our first line test of what's correct: > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/idx/utilities.html > ah, i didn't know this. thanks for the link. sorry if i didn't make it clear that i was not intending to imply that mismatches were bugs in busybox (i made sure not to use the word 'bug' in my previous email); i just found that there were things that behaved differently between busybox and the implementation that comes standard on GNU systems that i use, which was coreutils. i'll contact the coreutils people about some of these issues. > > You opened your bugs as "standards compliance" without referencing a > standard. sorry again, this is my first time posting on this list and in the busybox bug database :) > > > Beyond that, lots of the behavior in coreutils is sheer bloat. I looked at > several of your things and you're asking us to make the code bigger, in > ways > not required by any standard, in order to provide features of negligible > utility. i totally agree, and perhaps i shouldn't have placed those records in the bug database in the first place, and instead simply emailed them as questions. i can see now that putting them in the database implies that i thought they were bugs in busybox, which i didn't mean at all. i thought it would be a good location to have discussions about whether those are actually bugs. in fact, i'd really appreciate it if people chime in and respond to the appropriate bug database entries with "no, you're wrong, this is NOT a bug" and close the report if they feel it's appropriate. > > > In fact, in some cases: > http://busybox.net/bugs/view.php?id=6174 > > You're asking us to implement undocumented behavior that looks like a bug > to > me. You asked the coreutils to unset a variable, you gave it an insane > variable name (environment variable names shouldn't have = in them), and it > did something other than what you asked. The man page doesn't suggest env > has the behavior you found, in fact it says it _won't_ do that. yep, i agree; that seems like a weird thing for coreutils to do, and i will report this issue to them; i'm fairly certain that busybox is correct in this case. > > > The fact busybox does not have this bug is not a problem with busybox. > Honest > and truly it isn't... > > Rob > Philip
_______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/busybox
