[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [OT] Is od broken?
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: [OT] Is od broken? |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:59:07 +0200 |
Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes:
>
>>
>> Gary noticed an issue with the indentation of multi-specifier od:
>>
>> $ od -t cx1 abc.txt
>> ~ 0000000 T h i s i s a b c f i l e
>> ~ 54 68 69 73 20 69 73 20 61 62 63 20 66 69 6c 65
>> ~ 0000020 \n
>> ~ 0a
>> ~ 0000021
>>
>> |> | That looks horrible!
>> |>
>> |> Not a compliance bug, but you are certainly welcome to report it upstream
>> |> as an QoI enhancement request.
...
> Here's my attempt at a series to address this:
>
> Eric Blake (3):
> od defaults to -toS, not -td2.
> Align multiple od -t specs.
> Simplify long double support.
Thanks a lot!
This looks like a fine improvement.
I'll review the code tomorrow or Friday.
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/11
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/11
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/11
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?,
Jim Meyering <=
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Paul Eggert, 2008/06/11
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/11
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/12
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Jim Meyering, 2008/06/12
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Eric Blake, 2008/06/12
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Bo Borgerson, 2008/06/12
- Re: [OT] Is od broken?, Jim Meyering, 2008/06/13