[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
I'm trying to use lam(1), and I'm seeing behaviour that looks wrong to
me according to the manpage. Before I go too overboard, I thought
perhaps I should sanity-check it; perhaps I'm just misreading
I've reduced it to a simple test case:
% cat a
% cat bc
% lam -p -3.3 a bc
% lam -P -3.3 a bc
My reading of the manpage says that the output should be identical
between the two runs, except for two spaces of padding on each output
line in the second case (which can be eliminated by using, instead,
"lam -P -3.3 a -P 0 bc"). This (mis)behaviour is consistent across all
three of the NetBSD versions I use (1.4T, 4.0.1, and 5.2).
It looks to me as though, in the command-line parsing code, the
"ip->pad = P" in the non-option case is stomping on the "ip->pad = 1"
done in the 'p' case - does that look like an accurate diagnosis?
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Main Index |
Thread Index |