[arch-dev-public] [signoff] coreutils 8.4-3 - Arch-dev-public - lists.archlinux.org

newer
[arch-dev-public] [signoff]...

[arch-dev-public] [signoff] coreutils 8.4-3

older
[arch-dev-public] [signoff]...

Allan McRae

13 Apr 2010 13 Apr '10

2:04 p.m.

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004. Signoff both, Allan

Show replies by date

Andrea Scarpino

13 Apr 13 Apr

2:11 p.m.

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

Signoff both, Allan signoff x86_64

-- Andrea | deelab.org/bash

Dieter Plaetinck

14 Apr 14 Apr

6:42 p.m.

On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:11:43 +0200 Andrea Scarpino wrote:

On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

...
This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

Signoff both, Allan signoff x86_64

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer. Dieter

Thomas Bächler

7:40 p.m.

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

...
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

...
This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are used instead.

Allan McRae

15 Apr 15 Apr

1:28 a.m.

On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

...
...
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

...
This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are used instead.

In general, this is the only real difference: NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not. test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING. The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your shell does not provide "[". Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs. Allan

Dieter Plaetinck

9:10 a.m.

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000 Allan McRae wrote:

On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...
Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

...
...
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

...
This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are used instead.

In general, this is the only real difference: NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not. test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your shell does not provide "[".

Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.

I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to upstream. Dieter

Allan McRae

12:04 p.m.

On 15/04/10 17:10, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000 Allan McRae wrote:

...
On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...
Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

...
...
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote:

...
This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see what this change will break. Having the symlink does break some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink to the binary for "[" in 2004.

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are used instead.

In general, this is the only real difference: NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not. test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your shell does not provide "[".

Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.

I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to upstream.

Anyway.... can I now have an i686 signoff? :P

Allan McRae

24 Apr 24 Apr

9:12 a.m.

On 15/04/10 20:04, Allan McRae wrote:

On 15/04/10 17:10, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:

...
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:04 +1000 Allan McRae wrote:

...
On 15/04/10 03:40, Thomas Bächler wrote:

...
Am 14.04.2010 18:42, schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:

...
...
On Tuesday 13 April 2010 14:04:44 Allan McRae wrote: > This changes /usr/bin/[ from a symlink to /usr/bin/test to the > actual binary provided upstream. The use of the symlink has > been in Arch for ages (probably for ever), but I can not see > what this change will break. Having the symlink does break > some stuff (FS#19063). Note that Fedora moved from the symlink > to the binary for "[" in 2004.

so what exactly does the binary do? is it an exact copy of /usr/bin/test, is it a small program that does exec(), or .. ? I downloaded the 8.4 tarball but couldn't quickly find the answer.

I don't think it matters. Neither [ nor test from coreutils are actually ever used - the bash (or whatever shell you use) builtins [ and test are used instead.

In general, this is the only real difference: NOTE: [ honors the --help and --version options, but test does not. test treats each of those as it treats any other nonempty STRING.

The rest I think is better compatibility with test synatx when your shell does not provide "[".

Anyway, we should be supplying what upstream installs.

I asked it just out of curiosity. I agree we should stick to upstream.

Anyway.... can I now have an i686 signoff? :P

This has taken so long the package is now out of date... I am moving it. Allan

5122

Age (days ago)

5133

Last active (days ago)

Download

7 comments

4 participants

tags

participants (4)

Allan McRae
Andrea Scarpino
Dieter Plaetinck
Thomas Bächler