> > I see the new new behaviour of expr(1) requires you to add '--' if your
> > commandline arguments might start with a '-'. This does break things
> > a little because our old expr(1) does not understand a '--' in the
> > beginning and the new one don't work right without it. :-(((
> I'm almost positive this issue was discussed before.  Check the follow
> ups to the commit.

The only one I could find was in -current, where Kris asked if w3m or
expr is to blame and Garrett said w3m is to blame.

> > The place where I noticed it was when libtool started to complain
> > when compiling jade. Libtool does things like:
> > 
> > expr -L/export/ports/textproc/jade/work/jade-1.2.1/lib/.libs : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -lsp : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -lm : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -lgrove : -l\(.*\)
> > 
> > On -current this now have to be:
> > 
> > expr -- -L/export/ports/textproc/jade/work/jade-1.2.1/lib/.libs : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -- -lsp : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -- -lm : -l\(.*\)
> > expr -- -lgrove : -l\(.*\)
> > 
> > If we are going to leave this behaviour, we will have to teach libtool
> > how to call expr(1) differently on -stable and -current and it looks
> > like yet again different from the rest of the world. :-(((
> This should exactly match the behavior of any certified UNIX system.

Well libtool is still broken, so maybe if systems like that do exist,
they don't need libtool? :-)))

> > Yes, I did read the commit message, but I still think the behaviour
> > of the new expr(1) is wrong.
> Not according to the Standard, or the response from Garrett's request
> for clarification of the Standard.

Hmmmm. I can understand the requirement to eat '--', but to throw a
tantrum just because the commandline started with a '-' is a little
too much. BTW, was the response posted somewhere? I searched through
-standards, -commit and -current but couldn't find it. Maybe I just
didn't ask the right question to the search engine or maybe it was
in another list.


To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to