Re: printf(1) bug?

[Paul Eggert]

Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:

> However, since coreutils accepts hh as an extension, should it issue a
> warning if the string being printed does not fit in an unsigned char?  Or
> should it silently wrap around, and print 0 instead of 256?  Or are we
> okay with keeping status quo that the size specifiers must be valid
> according to printf(3) rules, but are otherwise ignored?

ksh and bash ignore size specifiers, so there's good precedent for the
current behavior.  I'd leave it alone.