Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 08:17:22AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I looked at both. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree here --- > > Yes, but thats your lack of understanding prose logic, not a valid > disagreement: Is insulting people what "agree to disagree" means? :) This is my last reply to this bug. (I will be happy to continue to pursue the manpages-dev bug, though.) I think you completely misunderstood my intent here. As both you and I have mentioned, whether you are interpreting POSIX correctly here is entirely irrelevant. As you mentioned, Unix tradition, user expectations, and what applications actually do are more important as a normative force. As I mentioned, the upstream Linux maintainers could care less about what POSIX says. So why am I bothering to mention that this part of POSIX, not unusually for a piece of text that probably used to be a Solaris manpage and was only later massaged into a standards document, has room for improvement? Because I would like to see it improved. This seems like an example of the "platform problem"[1] --- we are not used to having the power to talk to and help the people that make the software and documentation we use, so it looks like a rigid thing. But yeah, if you want to interpret it as me being argumentative and in denial about a bug instead of paying attention to what I am saying, go right ahead. [1] http://lwn.net/Articles/443531/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110610135858.GA3594@elie
