> Why should policy example follow some other code out there, > especially if the examples shown in policy are correct? And it has > not been shown that which messes up, command -v would work > differently, but not which.
I was shown earlier than which returns pathnames of files that aren't executable. However, testing today reveals that which has been fixed in sarge, so I agree that the report can be closed. Sorry for the trouble. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ echo $PATH /home/jdthood/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/games [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /tmp/woody-debianutils/usr/bin/which foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ which foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ touch /home/jdthood/bin/foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /home/jdthood/bin/foobar -rw-r--r-- 1 jdthood jdthood 0 2005-06-18 10:25 /home/jdthood/bin/foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ /tmp/woody-debianutils/usr/bin/which foobar /home/jdthood/bin/foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ which foobar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -s debianutils | grep Version Version: 2.8.4 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ -- Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
