Hi, On Tue, 02.11.2010 at 19:54:40 -0500, Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> wrote: > # this is how fnmatch() is documented to work
you can document all you want, including that 'ls' is suddenly meant to behave like 'rm -f', but that doesn't make it any better. > The relevant detail is that what [a-z] matches depends on the > collation order. This gives globs like [??-??] a more useful > (locale-specific) meaning than the C.UTF-8 collation order would > dictate, with the unfortunate side-effect of giving [a-z] > counterintuitive behavior with respect to case folding[1]. I must admit that I am not sure that I completely understood your opengroup references, but would like to point out that programmers and systems administrators may have quite different requirements than "end users", which these Posix documents are clearly aimed at, and that these people are also most likely constitute the majority of bash users. End users are expected to use a GUI these days, where their nautilus, konqueror and what-have-you can sort files all the way *they* want. I just verified that dash does *NOT* ignore case like bash does. IOW, scripts intended to run on both bash and dash may behave differently, depending on which shell they are actually run by. This should hold for a large part of system scripts in Debian. I therefore request that the options nocaseglob and nocasematch are made to work as primarily documented, ie, without any hidden gotchas. Ie, these options should override, not be overridden by, the effects of LC_*. > Toni Mueller wrote: > > Upping the severity due to possible negative impact (I've been bitten > > several times, too), semi-hidden documentation, > > A separate bug report suggesting how to improve the documentation > would be welcome. I'd rather have the behaviour return to a sane state, than having this idiocy documented any better, although attaching big flashing warning signs to these options and stating any workaround might be a first step to prevent people from getting snared. > Hope that helps, Not really. > [1] > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html#tag_18_13_01 > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/V1_chap09.html#tag_09_03_05 > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=35;bug=570929 -- Kind regards, --Toni++ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org