Path: csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!panix!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From: Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: Wrong command option in the manual examples
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2019 10:59:43 -0400
Lines: 22
Approved: bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID: <mailman.883.1569250817.2190.bug-bash@gnu.org>
References: <59cf49b0-1292-b752-4fe8-8928fd558ebf@iki.fi> <CAD0rTC6EHd5w5A6kuD850mLzu+V_EJXQyoZ=amQcF9TktTSEJA@mail.gmail.com> <38052651-6d67-6107-660c-707ca39ee00c@case.edu> <23726.1569247367@jinx.noi.kre.to> <20190923145943.GX28751@eeg.ccf.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: usenet.stanford.edu 1569250817 28896 209.51.188.17 (23 Sep 2019 15:00:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: action@cs.stanford.edu
To: bug-bash@gnu.org
Envelope-to: bug-bash@gnu.org
Mail-Followup-To: bug-bash@gnu.org
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <23726.1569247367@jinx.noi.kre.to>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 139.137.100.1
X-BeenThere: bug-bash@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: <20190923145943.GX28751@eeg.ccf.org>
X-Mailman-Original-References: <59cf49b0-1292-b752-4fe8-8928fd558ebf@iki.fi> <CAD0rTC6EHd5w5A6kuD850mLzu+V_EJXQyoZ=amQcF9TktTSEJA@mail.gmail.com> <38052651-6d67-6107-660c-707ca39ee00c@case.edu> <23726.1569247367@jinx.noi.kre.to>
Xref: csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:15414

On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 09:02:47PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> There is no real standard for this - NetBSD has deprecated the -depth
> operator (which never really was one) and replaced it by a -d option
> which makes much more sense (-depth never really was the right way to
> do it).  -depth (the old way) is still supported for compat with old
> scripts, but is only mentioned in doc in the STANDARDS section, as:

But... there literally *is* a real standard for this.

<https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/find.html>

   -depth
      The primary shall always evaluate as true; it shall cause descent
      of the directory hierarchy to be done so that all entries in a
      directory are acted on before the directory itself. If a -depth
      primary is not specified, all entries in a directory shall be acted
      on after the directory itself. If any -depth primary is specified,
      it shall apply to the entire expression even if the -depth primary
      would not normally be evaluated.

If the POSIX standard isn't real enough, then I don't know what is.