The one specified by mdoc is hard to read for non-native
speakers from countries which read the date day-first (like
Germany, Greece, North-Korea, Swamp,...).
This is also consistent with how we generally specify dates
at suckless.org.
Rely on what the system provides. These are not standardized macros
but any relevant UNIX system will provide them.
We can revisit this in the future if something breaks.
The logic is simple, it's just a pain in the ass to fill the
data-structures.
Some lines had to be commented out, as glibc/musl apparently
have not fully implemented the mandatory variables for the
2013 corrigendum of POSIX 2008.
Also added a manpage and the necessary entries in README.
I also removed it from the TODO.
Yeah, if the skipping is longer than the file itself, we need
to take the skip value, not the address.
Also, only print the last newline when we've actually printed
at least 1 address.
If this flag is not given, od(1) automatically replaces duplicate
adjacent lines with an '*' for each reoccurence.
If this flag is set, thus, no such filtering occurs.
In this case this would mean having to somehow keep the last printed
line in some backbuffer, building the next line and then doing the
necessary comparisons. This basically means that we duplicate the
functionality provided with uniq(1).
So instead of
$ od -t a > dump
you'd rather do
$ od -t a | uniq -f 1 -c > dump
Skipping the first field is necessary, as the addresses obviously differ.
Now, I was thinking hard why this flag even exists. If POSIX mandated
to add the address before the asterisk, so we know the offset of duplicate
occurrences, this would make sense. However, this is not the case.
Using uniq(1) also gives nicer output:
~ $ echo "111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111" | od -t a -v | uniq -f 1 -c
3 0000000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 0000060 nl
1 0000061
in comparison to
$ echo "111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111" | od -t a
0000000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
*
0000060 nl
0000061
Before working on od(1), I didn't even know it would filter out
duplicate adjacent lines like that. This is also a matter of
predictability.
Concluding, the v-flag is implicitly set and users urged to just
use the existing tools provided by the system.
I don't think we would break scripts either. Firstly, it's rather
unlikely to have duplicate lines exactly matching the line-length of
od(1). Secondly, even if a script did that specifically, in the worst
case there would be a counting error or something.
Given od(1) is mostly used interactively, we can safely assume this
feature is for the benefit of the users.
Ditch this legacy POSIX crap!
Please enter the commit message for your changes. Lines starting
This is a utility function to allow easy parsing of file or other
offsets, automatically taking in regard suffixes, proper bases and
so on, for instance used in split(1) -b or od -j, -N(1).
Of course, POSIX is very arbitrary when it comes to defining the
parsing rules for different tools.
The main focus here lies on being as flexible and consistent as
possible. One central utility-function handling the parsing makes
this stuff a lot more trivial.
It was possible to make some sections of the code shorter.
Also fix a bug where the last printed address was always in hex
rather than depending on the radix chosen.
getline(3) expects newline-terminated input. While glibc's
implementation seems to catch unterminated input and zero the
buffer, other versions (notably musl's) do not.
This is a workaround. Garbage will still be read, but
not printed.
This client does not support the netascii mode. The default mode
is octet/binary and should be sufficient.
One thing left to do is to check the source port of the server
to make sure it doesn't change. If it does, we should ignore the
packet and send an error back without disturbing an existing
transfer.
Previously, a line read from file 1 before a strcmp was
performed would be overwritten and lost. Something like
this:
comm one_line_file empty_file
produced no output.
This patch is a bit inelegant, but quite simple.
