Ralf Corsepius wrote: : On Tue, 2007-12-11 at 21:29 -0800, Dean S. Messing wrote: : > Tony Nelson writes: : > : The reason seems weak to me, but test does not require a closing square : > : bracket, while [ does, and: : > : : > : At 6:22 PM +0200 5/11/07, Stepan Kasal wrote: : > : >Hi, : > : > : > : >On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:44:39PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote: : > : >> single square brackets, I thought "[" was a symlink to the : > : >> coreutils "test" command, [..] : > : > : > : >AFAIK, it used to be hard link, not symlink. : > : > : > : >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 32168 Apr 17 13:48 /usr/bin/[ : > : >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 29544 Apr 17 13:48 /usr/bin/test : > : > : > : >GNU Coding Standards now declare that the behaviour of binary : > : >should not depend on its name. : > : > The new coding standards : : New? Even version 1.1 of GNU standards (Sun Mar 8 06:28:22 1992 UTC (15 : years, 9 months ago)) carries this rule: : : http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/gnustandards/standards.texi?revision=1.1&root=gnustandards&view=markup : : > put quite a crimp in the use of : > /sbin/busybox, /sbin/lvm, and a lot of other useful linux modules, I : > would think. : > : > What's the rationale behind this standard? : : >From [1] : <cite> : @node Preface : @chapter About the GNU Coding Standards : : The GNU Coding Standards were written by Richard Stallman and other GNU : Project volunteers. Their purpose is to make the GNU system clean, : consistent, and easy to install. This document can also be read as a : guide to writing portable, robust and reliable programs. It focuses on : programs written in C, but many of the rules and principles are useful : even if you write in another programming language. The rules often : state reasons for writing in a certain way. : </cite> : : > I've written several : > useful pieces of signal processing code whose behaviour depends on the : > name one uses to call it. Now, self-modifying code---that I can : > understand. :-) : : >From [1] : <cite> : @cindex program name and its behavior : @cindex behavior, dependent on program's name : Please don't make the behavior of a utility depend on the name used : to invoke it. It is useful sometimes to make a link to a utility : with a different name, and that should not change what it does. : : Instead, use a run time option or a compilation switch or both : to select among the alternate behaviors. : </cite> : : Ralf : [1] http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/gnustandards/gnustandards/standards.texi : Thanks, Ralf, for enlightening me. I wrote "new coding standards", above, in response to Stepan Kasal's remark that "GNU Coding Standards now declare ...". I suppose the latter is literally true even if the Standard was defined in 1992. Of course, with this new knowledge, I will feel as free as a bird to boldly ignore the Standard (in this respect) seeing how several other prominent linux executables (busybox, lvm, dump/restore, halt, to name a few) have been blithely ignoring it for more than a decade. ½:-) Dean
