Re: Wrong command option in the manual examples

From	Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Subject	Re: Wrong command option in the manual examples
Date	2019-09-23 10:59 -0400
Message-ID	<mailman.883.1569250817.2190.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
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>

Show all headers | View raw

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.

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Wrong command option in the manual examples Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-09-23 10:59 -0400

csiph-web