From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sean" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix use of wc in t0000-basic Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4616.10.10.10.24.1116637985.squirrel@linux1> References: <4600.10.10.10.24.1116637737.squirrel@linux1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: "Linus Torvalds" , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat May 21 03:13:01 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DZIXt-00046X-2o for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 21 May 2005 03:12:53 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261615AbVEUBNd (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261560AbVEUBNd (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:33 -0400 Received: from simmts5.bellnexxia.net ([206.47.199.163]:928 "EHLO simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261615AbVEUBNN (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:13 -0400 Received: from linux1 ([69.156.111.46]) by simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.10 201-253-122-130-110-20040306) with ESMTP id <20050521011305.TOZS11606.simmts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@linux1>; Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:05 -0400 Received: from linux1 (linux1.attic.local [127.0.0.1]) by linux1 (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4L1D5WX012089; Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:05 -0400 Received: from 10.10.10.24 (SquirrelMail authenticated user sean) by linux1 with HTTP; Fri, 20 May 2005 21:13:05 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: To: "Daniel Barkalow" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.4-2 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 20, 2005 9:10 pm, Daniel Barkalow said: > On Fri, 20 May 2005, Sean wrote: > >> You can't do "wc -l filename" because some versionso of "wc" then >> include >> the filename in their output and confuse things. That was the reason >> to >> use "cat" in the first place. > > You're reading my patch backwards. > Yes, i was. But presumably someone was stripping the whitespace from wc for a reason? Either way the sed-only solution seems a little cleaner. Sean