On Aug 31, 2009, at 7:46 PM, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Mark J. Reed wrote:
>> "More POSIX conforming than POSIX requires" would seem to be an
>> oxymoron, if not a paradox. And POSIX explicitly allows "echo -n".
>
> Yes, that's what I mean. Back in the early days of Leopard, when
> people complained about the missing -n in sh's echo, Apple said it
> is because of POSIX conformity.
>
>> Does the builtin echo in sh have any way to suppress a newline?
>> Maybe
>> the venerable "\c"?
>
> Yes, "\c" works, although this is an extension of POSIX echo, just
> as "-n".
>
> Otherwise use printf or /bin/echo -n instead of echo -n. Or bash
> instead of sh.
>
> --
> Martin
Would it be appropriate to patch altpdf{la}tex to avoid this problem?
Ben
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Fink-users mailing list
Fink-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-users
