| H A D | scandir.c | dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
|
| H A D | opendir.c | dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
dcdafd0e Mon Jan 18 10:17:51 GMT 2010 Andrey A. Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> a) Use strcoll() in opendir() and alphasort() as POSIX 2008 requires.
It also matches now how our 'ls' works for years.
b) Remove comment expressed 2 fears:
1) One just simple describe how strcoll() works in _any_ context,
not for directories only. Are we plan to remove strcoll() from everything
just because it is little more complex than strcmp()? I doubt, and
directories give nothing different here. Moreover, strcoll() used
in 'ls' for years and nobody complaints yet.
2) Plain wrong statement about undefined strcoll() behaviour. strcoll()
always gives predictable results, falling back to strcmp() on any
trouble, see strcoll(3).
No objections from -current list discussion.
|