Re: [bug #24949] coreutils pwd not implementing latest POSIX features

[Jim Meyering]

Paul Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 10:33 +0000, James Youngman wrote:
>> If you can rely enough on the platform being POSIX-conforming for -P
>> to work, then why not just use Perl's POSIX module?
>
> On some embedded systems where the rootfs is in a ramdisk I use, for
> example, microperl.  This is an amazingly flexible and powerful
> scripting language with a very small footprint, BUT it contains no Perl
> modules whatsoever.  Some of these systems use busybox pwd but not all.
>
> And of course there are other scripting languages that would like to
> invoke pwd that don't have their own built-in modules.  Even just
> writing a portable sh script isn't easy since POSIX-compliant sh's are
> not required to have a built-in pwd.
>
> I should admit that regardless of how this turns out I'll have to take
> defensive measures since any change in coreutils, even if made today,
> can't be relied upon "in the wild" for many years to come.  Still, we
> should DTRT where possible.

We're just waiting for someone to write the patch.
If you can spare the time to do the complete job, please let us know.