GNU bug report logs - #15486
Should references to POSIX.2 in grep.1 be changed?

Previous Next

Package: grep;

Reported by: gdg <at> zplane.com

Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:47:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: notabug

Done: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 15486 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 15486 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-grep <at> gnu.org:
bug#15486; Package grep. (Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:47:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to gdg <at> zplane.com:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-grep <at> gnu.org. (Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:47:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Golden <gdg <at> zplane.com>
To: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
Cc: bug-grep <at> gnu.org
Subject: Should references to POSIX.2 in grep.1 be changed?
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 11:46:31 -0600
--
(This came up as a side issue when looking into details of bug #15483;
it's not directly related, so filing as a separate report.)

There's a FAQ put out by opengroup.org

    http://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/posix_faq.html

which remarks (Q10) that "a POSIX.2 standard no longer exists".  Should 
grep.1 [2.14] (which refers to POSIX.2 in several places) be updated to refer
instead to "the Shell and Utilties volume of POSIX.1-2008"? Or perhaps just
"POSIX.1"?




Information forwarded to bug-grep <at> gnu.org:
bug#15486; Package grep. (Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:06:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: gdg <at> zplane.com
Cc: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>, 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#15486: Should references to POSIX.2 in grep.1 be changed?
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 07:04:41 -0700
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Glenn Golden <gdg <at> zplane.com> wrote:
> --
> (This came up as a side issue when looking into details of bug #15483;
> it's not directly related, so filing as a separate report.)
>
> There's a FAQ put out by opengroup.org
>
>     http://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/posix_faq.html
>
> which remarks (Q10) that "a POSIX.2 standard no longer exists".  Should
> grep.1 [2.14] (which refers to POSIX.2 in several places) be updated to refer
> instead to "the Shell and Utilties volume of POSIX.1-2008"? Or perhaps just
> "POSIX.1"?

close 15486
thanks

Actually, "POSIX" seems fine, now.
Thanks for the suggestion. I've made the switch with the attached patch:
[k.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

Information forwarded to bug-grep <at> gnu.org:
bug#15486; Package grep. (Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:22:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
To: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
Cc: gdg <at> zplane.com, 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#15486: Should references to POSIX.2 in grep.1 be changed?
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 08:20:55 -0600
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 10/01/2013 08:04 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Glenn Golden <gdg <at> zplane.com> wrote:
>> --
>> (This came up as a side issue when looking into details of bug #15483;
>> it's not directly related, so filing as a separate report.)
>>
>> There's a FAQ put out by opengroup.org
>>
>>     http://www.opengroup.org/austin/papers/posix_faq.html
>>
>> which remarks (Q10) that "a POSIX.2 standard no longer exists".  Should
>> grep.1 [2.14] (which refers to POSIX.2 in several places) be updated to refer
>> instead to "the Shell and Utilties volume of POSIX.1-2008"? Or perhaps just
>> "POSIX.1"?
> 
> close 15486
> thanks
> 
> Actually, "POSIX" seems fine, now.
> Thanks for the suggestion. I've made the switch with the attached patch:

You only attached a gnulib submodule patch, rather than the intended one :)

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Information forwarded to bug-grep <at> gnu.org:
bug#15486; Package grep. (Tue, 01 Oct 2013 14:26:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net>
To: Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
Cc: gdg <gdg <at> zplane.com>, 15486 <15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#15486: Should references to POSIX.2 in grep.1 be changed?
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 07:24:47 -0700
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Thanks, Eric.
Here's the intended patch:

FTR, I think it was induced by this command:

   git grep -l 'POSIX.[12]'| xargs perl -pi -e 's/POSIX\.[12]/POSIX/'
[k.txt (text/plain, attachment)]

bug closed, send any further explanations to 15486 <at> debbugs.gnu.org and gdg <at> zplane.com Request was from Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Mon, 28 Oct 2013 00:22:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Added tag(s) notabug. Request was from Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Mon, 28 Oct 2013 01:49:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:24:06 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 10 years and 175 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.