2016-12-01 07:04:05 +, Stephane Chazelas:
> 2016-11-30 18:37:05 -0800, Paul Eggert:
> [...]
> > In the meantime if you could submit a patch for the
> > documentation that should fix the immediate documentation
> > problem.
> [...]
>
> What about:
[...]
> +Please note that @command{pr} currentl
2016-11-30 18:37:05 -0800, Paul Eggert:
[...]
> In the meantime if you could submit a patch for the
> documentation that should fix the immediate documentation
> problem.
[...]
What about:
diff --git a/doc/coreutils.texi b/doc/coreutils.texi
index cc85f22..6eb497b 100644
--- a/doc/coreutils.texi
2016-11-30 18:37:05 -0800, Paul Eggert:
> On 11/30/2016 03:30 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> >That can also be seen as a POSIX conformance bug
>
> Not really, as POSIX does not require support for UTF-8 (except in
> the pax utility, which is not part of coreutils).
[...]
POSIX does not require su
On 11/30/2016 03:30 AM, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
That can also be seen as a POSIX conformance bug
Not really, as POSIX does not require support for UTF-8 (except in the
pax utility, which is not part of coreutils).
It'd be nice if pr etc. could be made to work cleanly for UTF-8. In the
mean
Only arguing on the classification of this bug here.
Let's call a cat a cat. When something doesn't work as
documented, it's a bug, not a wishlist entry.
AFAICT, there's nothing in the GNU coreutils documentation that
states that pr only works on input that consists exclusively of
single-byte cha
