|
From: | L A Walsh |
Subject: | bug#25388: Bug in ls, kills existing scripts reading "ls" -1 as input |
Date: | Mon, 09 Jan 2017 12:35:46 -0800 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird |
Paul Eggert wrote:
On 01/09/2017 12:00 PM, L A Walsh wrote:I wasn't asking for a change to _that_ specific behavior.You argued that it's not standard for 'ls' to behave differently when piping output to a pager, and that the recent change was therefore undesirable.
==== I stand corrected for the historical behavior. I also stand for it being strongly against GNU standards to add more such behaviors.
As the premise for this argument was incorrect, it shouldn't be surprising if readers disagree with its conclusion.
---- Now you are deliberately excluding the fact. While my initial stance was that it was engaging in non-standard behavior (which is true) -- it is also the case that an exception was made for 'ls' for historical behavior. This is not historical behavior. 'ls' doesn't geta carte blanc to change output anyway it wants because of a specific historical behavior.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |