[ast-developers] No "ls.c" in ast-ksh's src/lib/libcmd/ ? was: Re: AT&T Software Technology ast alpha software download update

[Roland Mainz]

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

Minor issue:
1. The annoucement email didn't contain any comments about libcmd changes
2. src/lib/libcmd/RELEASE says...
-- snip --
13-08-11 ls.c: move from src/cmd/std
-- snip --
... but there is no ls.c in the ast-ksh sources...

----

Bye,
Roland

[Glenn Fowler]

Post by Roland Mainz

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic

I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

background: ast fts*() was unwound from ast ftwalk() and then proposed to posix
bsd joined in the proposal
ite never made it into posix (too much invention) but bsd retained it

anyway, for the next alpha the top of my list is to *at()-ize fts, add fts_dirfd,
eliminate chdir() calls by all of the libcmd -R commands, and then fts-ize ls

the last part is non-trivial because it involves fts_children(), the trickiest
part of the fts api -- particularly maddening is the fact that the current
ast ftwalk() itself uses fts -- I tabled it for this release and hope to have
a better day when I get back to it

Post by Roland Mainz
1. The annoucement email didn't contain any comments about libcmd changes
2. src/lib/libcmd/RELEASE says...
-- snip --
13-08-11 ls.c: move from src/cmd/std
-- snip --
... but there is no ls.c in the ast-ksh sources...

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Glenn Fowler

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

1. We are in alpha mode, right?
2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the
crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their
chances? :)

Ced

[Glenn Fowler]

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

1. We are in alpha mode, right?
2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the
crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their
chances? :)

there's more work involved than fts-izing
and there is nothing worse than a busted ls
if a builtin ls screws up it takes the shell with it
so no quick fix here

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

1. We are in alpha mode, right?
2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the
crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their
chances? :)

there's more work involved than fts-izing
and there is nothing worse than a busted ls
if a builtin ls screws up it takes the shell with it
so no quick fix here

That's what alpha's are for. Or add a SHOPT_LSBUILTIN for the more
(willingly) risk-taking audience.

That's reminds me to renew Lionel's SHOPT_EXPERIMENTAL proposal so
that new or potentially risky features can be moved earlier into the
source than you currently do it. Not all here agree with the current
snail's pace of development.

Ced

[Glenn Fowler]

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

1. We are in alpha mode, right?
2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the
crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their
chances? :)

there's more work involved than fts-izing
and there is nothing worse than a busted ls
if a builtin ls screws up it takes the shell with it
so no quick fix here

That's what alpha's are for. Or add a SHOPT_LSBUILTIN for the more
(willingly) risk-taking audience.
That's reminds me to renew Lionel's SHOPT_EXPERIMENTAL proposal so
that new or potentially risky features can be moved earlier into the
source than you currently do it. Not all here agree with the current
snail's pace of development.

I can't in good conscience put in anything I know doesn't work
especially things that are in the inner loop of the build process
you really want half-assed code in alphas?

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Glenn Fowler

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api

1. We are in alpha mode, right?
2. Since we are in 1., could you not just add it *NOW* and let the
crazy audience which dares enough to use builtin ls; ls -l take their
chances? :)

there's more work involved than fts-izing
and there is nothing worse than a busted ls
if a builtin ls screws up it takes the shell with it
so no quick fix here

That's what alpha's are for. Or add a SHOPT_LSBUILTIN for the more
(willingly) risk-taking audience.
That's reminds me to renew Lionel's SHOPT_EXPERIMENTAL proposal so
that new or potentially risky features can be moved earlier into the
source than you currently do it. Not all here agree with the current
snail's pace of development.

I can't in good conscience put in anything I know doesn't work
especially things that are in the inner loop of the build process
you really want half-assed code in alphas?

If its less bad then cd -@ .; cd .. then add it. If it's worse don't.

On 2nd thought - the broken cd -@ .;cd .. can't be topped.

Ced

[ольга крыжановская]

Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

Olga

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Roland Mainz

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api
background: ast fts*() was unwound from ast ftwalk() and then proposed to posix
bsd joined in the proposal
ite never made it into posix (too much invention) but bsd retained it
anyway, for the next alpha the top of my list is to *at()-ize fts, add fts_dirfd,
eliminate chdir() calls by all of the libcmd -R commands, and then fts-ize ls
the last part is non-trivial because it involves fts_children(), the trickiest
part of the fts api -- particularly maddening is the fact that the current
ast ftwalk() itself uses fts -- I tabled it for this release and hope to have
a better day when I get back to it

Post by Roland Mainz
1. The annoucement email didn't contain any comments about libcmd changes
2. src/lib/libcmd/RELEASE says...
-- snip --
13-08-11 ls.c: move from src/cmd/std
-- snip --
... but there is no ls.c in the ast-ksh sources...

_______________________________________________
ast-developers mailing list
ast-developers at lists.research.att.com
http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers

[Glenn Fowler]

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?
Olga

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by Roland Mainz

the AT&T Software Technology ast alpha 2013-08-29 source release
has been posted to the download site
http://www.research.att.com/sw/download/alpha/
the package names and md5 checksums are
INIT 132e0403af573fa1cb1e202267fedeb8
ast-open 334615fb3a652575106194c281d27b5c
ast-ksh ebcc56d9ab673aaafbb163d6eee1a93c
the md5 sums should match the ones listed on the download page

well that RELEASE note was optimistic
I had it and ls.c over there before I realized that ast ls has not been fts-ized yet
it uses the ancient ast pre-fts ftwalk() api
background: ast fts*() was unwound from ast ftwalk() and then proposed to posix
bsd joined in the proposal
ite never made it into posix (too much invention) but bsd retained it
anyway, for the next alpha the top of my list is to *at()-ize fts, add fts_dirfd,
eliminate chdir() calls by all of the libcmd -R commands, and then fts-ize ls
the last part is non-trivial because it involves fts_children(), the trickiest
part of the fts api -- particularly maddening is the fact that the current
ast ftwalk() itself uses fts -- I tabled it for this release and hope to have
a better day when I get back to it

Post by Roland Mainz
1. The annoucement email didn't contain any comments about libcmd changes
2. src/lib/libcmd/RELEASE says...
-- snip --
13-08-11 ls.c: move from src/cmd/std
-- snip --
... but there is no ls.c in the ast-ksh sources...

_______________________________________________
ast-developers mailing list
ast-developers at lists.research.att.com
http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers

--
, _ _ ,
{ \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ }
.----'-/`-/ olga.kryzhanovska at gmail.com \-`\-'----.
`'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'`
/\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\
`--` `--`

[Irek Szczesniak]

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Do you have any estimate when the ls builtin will become available?

Irek

[Irek Szczesniak]

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Do you have any estimate when the ls builtin will become available?

Trying again with Glenn's new mail address. Sorry for the spam.

Irek

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Do you have any estimate when the ls builtin will become available?

Glenn, we are interested too. If you can't do updated ast-ksh tarballs
just send the patches in.

Ced

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Cedric Blancher

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Do you have any estimate when the ls builtin will become available?

Glenn, we are interested too. If you can't do updated ast-ksh tarballs
just send the patches in.

Crap. Same mistake as Irek - used Glenn's old email address. Sorry.

Ced

[Cedric Blancher]

Post by Irek Szczesniak

Post by Glenn Fowler

Post by ольга крыжановская
Glenn, are you dong this, and the ls(1) builtin, for the next alpha, please?

what you see later today is all dgk and I could muster
fts, builtin ls, sfpoll2 are near the top of the list for me after that

Do you have any estimate when the ls builtin will become available?

Glenn, how long will it take until the ls(1) builtin becomes available?

Ced