On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 10:06:24PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > Let me state once again, this has no bearing whatsoever over the proposed > change in policy and my question about whether escape codes/-e are to be > mentioned or not. It is for purely pendantic value.
I think it's an important point, because getting it wrong would have all sorts of nasty implications. > Firstly the synopsis: > > echo [string ...] > > 2.10.1 says that this means that everything that comes after echo are > operands, no options at all. Not precisely -- it means that there are no options required by POSIX. If we went with your interpretation, it would violate POSIX to provide any options for a command which weren't present in the POSIX synopsis. Thus, for example, bash could not be an implementation of a POSIX shell unless it discards support for -b, -h, -k, -m, -o, -p, -t, -B, -H, and -P -- Raul
