On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 09:17:21AM +0100, Theo Buehler wrote: > On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 12:00:36AM -0500, Michael McConville wrote: > > Thoughts? ok? > > > > It makes sense to me to document this in the manual, and not in a README > file that no-one reads, so ok from me, but please wait for jmc@'s input. >
i already replied off-list. > Note that this bug used to be documented in the manual, but it was first > commented out by jmc in -r1.91 (2005) and then deleted by you in -r1.167 > this year. > well, that's embarrassing ;) i think it was because of the redirection upstream and the fact that the bug was already covered in the readme. my commit message was poor, but there was a lot of stuff too trivial to list i guess. my advice to michael was that i had no real opinion about this but that his diff was excessively wordy. the trouble is i think there are some known bugs with ksh. i think it probably would be better to keep a note of them in a separate file, as is done now. i'm not really sure if we want to try and clutter the page with every bug we find. but i'm not the one doing work on this, so i didn;t want to say either way. > Moreover, shouldn't this bug be mentioned in sh.1 as well? > no. sh(1) attempts only to document features safe to use if you are interested in portability. i am not interested in trying to replicate info from ksh(1). you really need to read ksh(1) for stuff like that. jmc
