Re: sed _s_gnu_alternatives_ (Re: [rft] (g)awk substitution)

David Weinehall
2007-02-03T11:13:10Z

On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 07:14:07PM +0000, Oleg Verych wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2007 at 01:03:32PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Thursday 25 January 2007 4:40 am, Oleg Verych wrote:
> > > > Your objection is a bit like saying "and don't use cat". I'm saying don't
> > > > call cat "gcat" when you just mean plain old cat.
> > >
> > > No it's not, really. I don't want to see pipes, fork()s, disk seek,
> > > when task can be done without it. I know, what awk is, and i hope it
> > > will have its better time.
> >
> > *shrug* Making the need for "gawk" go away was my goal, and gawk->awk was the
> > minimal change. If you want more than that, I'm not objecting, just not
> > personally interested.
>
> Yes making uclibc as a bit more work, than rename things ;D. And my
> change is mainly from optimization point of view (say modern embedded ;)
>
> > I believe "shift 5" is also SUSv3. :)
>
> If you have tested, please send ack or nack to us.

Yes, shift [n] is available in SuSv3:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/shift.html

Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander (\
// Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/