Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Garrett D'Amore wrote: > The tricky part is dealing with the subtle semantic differences. For > example, what does date +%C output? For /usr/bin, its the default > strftime output. For standard conforming date it is the century > number. (Which means you should never use %C in a date format str

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Garrett D'Amore
On 03/ 2/10 01:44 PM, Peter Tribble wrote: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: On 03/ 2/10 03:57 AM, casper@sun.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amorewrote: I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Jens Elkner
On Tue, Mar 02, 2010 at 09:55:26PM +0100, ÏÌØÇÁ ËÒÙÖÁÎÏ×ÓËÁÑ wrote: > Our version of busybox is based on ksh93 and other AT&T AST utilities > (including GNU-compatible awk and sed). Ahh - ok. So it should be named a little bit different to avoid further confusion. Maybe kissyvox ? ;-) ... > > Wond

Re: [osol-code] Process contract adoption

2010-03-02 Thread David Powell
On 02/20/10 09:59, River Tarnell wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Liane Praza: Have you set CT_PR_INHERIT when creating the contracts so that they are adoptable? I saw this, but it wasn't clear if it would work correctly. My program is started by SMF; so, when my programs

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Cyril Plisko wrote: > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Alan Coopersmith > wrote: >> The replacement I used when converting the X gate from hg to teamware was > > Isn't it the other way around ? I hope you didn't go back from hg to TW... Sorry, right, *to* hg *from* TeamWare... clearly packets

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Cyril Plisko
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > The replacement I used when converting the X gate from hg to teamware was Isn't it the other way around ? I hope you didn't go back from hg to TW... -- Regards, Cyril ___ opensolaris

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Peter Tribble
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > On 03/ 2/10 03:57 AM, casper@sun.com wrote: >>> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore  wrote: >>> I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users to start using the POSIX defaults,

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Rainer Orth
Neale Ferguson writes: > Cool, I was just planning to build 4.5.0. I will hasten my plans. I'd wait for the release, though, which is still some time off. 4.5 hasn't even branched yet. Rainer -- - Rainer Orth,

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Neale Ferguson
Cool, I was just planning to build 4.5.0. I will hasten my plans. On 3/2/10 4:23 PM, "Rainer Orth" wrote: Neale Ferguson writes: > gcc 4.4 and beyond flags #ident as deprecated and issues a warning. For files > being compiled with the flag that says "treat warnings as errors" means > builds

[osol-code] getconf.c: improve portability

2010-03-02 Thread Richard L. Hamilton
Making some (more) of the table entries conditional on the symbol being defined allows getconf to compile on more systems; specifically, that (plus macports libintl) allowed compiling Solaris getconf (which knows more symbols, plus has the -a option) on Mac OS X. Attached were the changes. Maybe

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Rainer Orth
Neale Ferguson writes: > gcc 4.4 and beyond flags #ident as deprecated and issues a warning. For files > being compiled with the flag that says "treat warnings as errors" means > builds come to a stop. I am removing #idents as I find them so my build will > continue. Not true for the `beyond'

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Alan Coopersmith
James Carlson wrote: > Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> Those tags were originally expanded by teamware/SCCS. With mercurial, >> they are useless as they contain the original patterns rather than the >> expanded forms. We've been removing them from source code as we update it. > > To answer the next qu

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Bart Smaalders
On 03/02/10 12:51, James Carlson wrote: Garrett D'Amore wrote: Those tags were originally expanded by teamware/SCCS. With mercurial, they are useless as they contain the original patterns rather than the expanded forms. We've been removing them from source code as we update it. To answer the

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Neale Ferguson
gcc 4.4 and beyond flags #ident as deprecated and issues a warning. For files being compiled with the flag that says "treat warnings as errors" means builds come to a stop. I am removing #idents as I find them so my build will continue. On 3/2/10 3:51 PM, "James Carlson" wrote: Garrett D'Amor

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread ольга крыжановская
Our version of busybox is based on ksh93 and other AT&T AST utilities (including GNU-compatible awk and sed). Olga On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Jens Elkner wrote: >> From: ? >> >> Initial projects include: >> - ksh93-integration project >> - shell project >> - busybox (POSIX

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread James Carlson
Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Those tags were originally expanded by teamware/SCCS. With mercurial, > they are useless as they contain the original patterns rather than the > expanded forms. We've been removing them from source code as we update it. To answer the next question: we haven't looked for

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Jens Elkner
> From: ? > > Initial projects include: > - ksh93-integration project > - shell project > - busybox (POSIX core) development project > - shxml (XML shell API) development project > - POSIX utility modernisation Wondering why one needs busybox, when a ksh93 is available ... Rega

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Danek Duvall
Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Those tags were originally expanded by teamware/SCCS. With > mercurial, they are useless as they contain the original patterns > rather than the expanded forms. We've been removing them from source > code as we update it. All of those comments are also removed by the PR

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread I. Szczesniak
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > With the other non-standard changes being made to the default environment, I > wonder if it is time to finally bite the bullet and merge some of the XPG4 > and Sun commands -- some of the differences exist for some rather silly > (IMO) seman

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread I. Szczesniak
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> With the other non-standard changes being made to the >> default >> environment, I wonder if it is time to finally bite >> the bullet and merge >> some of the XPG4 and Sun commands -- some of the >> differences exist for >> some rather

Re: [osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Garrett D'Amore
Those tags were originally expanded by teamware/SCCS. With mercurial, they are useless as they contain the original patterns rather than the expanded forms. We've been removing them from source code as we update it. - Garrett On 03/ 2/10 11:44 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote: I noticed that the

[osol-code] about #pragma ident "%Z%%M% %I% %E% SMI"

2010-03-02 Thread Dennis Clarke
I noticed that there is very little reasonable data in the .comment section of my output binaries on snv_134. This probably has been around for a while but I just felt like asking finally. Have a look at this : $ uname -a SunOS aequitas 5.11 snv_134 i86pc i386 i86pc $ $ grep "^#pragma ident" /us

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Jennifer Pioch wrote: > I know one: It is currently unclear if an interpreter with a GPL v3 > license requires the scripts to use a GPL v3 license, too. The FSF has always been fairly clear that it does not - only those trying to spread license FUD seem to disagree: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Jennifer Pioch
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> With the other non-standard changes being made to the >> default >> environment, I wonder if it is time to finally bite >> the bullet and merge >> some of the XPG4 and Sun commands -- some of the >> differences exist for >> some rather

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Richard L. Hamilton
> With the other non-standard changes being made to the > default > environment, I wonder if it is time to finally bite > the bullet and merge > some of the XPG4 and Sun commands -- some of the > differences exist for > some rather silly (IMO) semantic differences that > portable code should >

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Bill Sommerfeld
On 03/01/10 22:02, Garrett D'Amore wrote: I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users to start using the POSIX defaults, instead of continuing to supply the legacy compatibility stuff forever. It's long past time that we did this.

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Garrett D'Amore
On 03/ 2/10 03:57 AM, casper@sun.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users to start using the POSIX defaults, instead of continuing to supply the legacy compatibility stuff forever.

Re: [osol-code] res_init() fails to initialize _res.nscount

2010-03-02 Thread Robert Milkowski
On 02/03/2010 08:55, Stacey Marshall wrote: What is the return code from res_init()? The sample code does not check! An additional safety enhancement to res_init/res_ninit is to set the number of name servers to zero when malloc fails to allocate additional space required to hold information

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Casper . Dik
>On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> >> I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users >> to start using the POSIX defaults, instead of continuing to supply the >> legacy compatibility stuff forever. >> >> It would save a little space, and maybe w

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Darren J Moffat
On 02/03/2010 11:33, Piotr Jasiukajtis wrote: On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users to start using the POSIX defaults, instead of continuing to supply the legacy compatibility stuff forever. It would s

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Piotr Jasiukajtis
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > I'm just thinking, isn't it time we just bit the bullet and told our users > to start using the POSIX defaults, instead of continuing to supply the > legacy compatibility stuff forever. > > It would save a little space, and maybe we could

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Peter Memishian
> I think people will usually agree that removing bloat and duplicated > binaries/code is a good thing. It makes maintenance easier and users get a > consistent environment. The same source is used to build both the XPG and Sun flavors. For instance, the rm command is built from the same sour

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Giovanni Tirloni
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Peter Memishian wrote: > > > With the other non-standard changes being made to the default > > environment, I wonder if it is time to finally bite the bullet and merge > > some of the XPG4 and Sun commands -- some of the differences exist for > > some rather sil

Re: [osol-code] res_init() fails to initialize _res.nscount

2010-03-02 Thread Robert Milkowski
On 02/03/2010 08:55, Stacey Marshall wrote: What is the return code from res_init()? The sample code does not check! An additional safety enhancement to res_init/res_ninit is to set the number of name servers to zero when malloc fails to allocate additional space required to hold information

Re: [osol-code] Update to POSIX versions of commands?

2010-03-02 Thread Peter Memishian
> With the other non-standard changes being made to the default > environment, I wonder if it is time to finally bite the bullet and merge > some of the XPG4 and Sun commands -- some of the differences exist for > some rather silly (IMO) semantic differences that portable code should > no

Re: [osol-code] res_init() fails to initialize _res.nscount

2010-03-02 Thread Stacey Marshall
What is the return code from res_init()? The sample code does not check! An additional safety enhancement to res_init/res_ninit is to set the number of name servers to zero when malloc fails to allocate additional space required to hold information used for IPv6. The following is extract from