Package: coreutils
Version: 8.25-2+b1
Severity: minor

Dear Maintainer,

The man page for dd does not define an interaction between bs and its more
specific ibs and obs options. POSIX does mandate that bs, if specified,
shall override ibs and obs. Empirically I have determined that coreutils
dd implements POSIX behaviour, so I should like to suggest the man page
is updated to state that bs overrides ibs and/or obs.


POSIX man page at http://www.unix.com/man-page/posix/1posix/dd/ defines
the three options bs, ibs, and obs as follows:

    ibs=expr
        Specify the input block size, in bytes, by expr (default is 512).

    obs=expr
        Specify the output block size, in bytes, by expr (default is 512).

    bs=expr
        Set  both input and output block sizes to expr bytes, superseding
        ibs= and obs=. If no conversion other than sync, noerror, and
        notrunc is specified, each input  block shall be copied to the
        output as a single block without aggregating short blocks.


Extracts from the current coreutils man page read as follows:

    bs=BYTES
        read and write up to BYTES bytes at a time

    ibs=BYTES
        read up to BYTES bytes at a time (default: 512)

    obs=BYTES
        write BYTES bytes at a time (default: 512)


I would like to suggest that the explanation is amended as follows:

    bs=BYTES
        read and write up to BYTES bytes at a time (default:
        512); overrides ibs and obs



-- System Information:
Debian Release: stretch/sid
  APT prefers stable
  APT policy: (900, 'stable'), (800, 'testing'), (300, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 4.8.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/1 CPU core)
Locale: LANG=en_GB.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)

Versions of packages coreutils depends on:
ii  libacl1      2.2.52-3
ii  libattr1     1:2.4.47-2
ii  libc6        2.24-8
ii  libselinux1  2.6-3

coreutils recommends no packages.

coreutils suggests no packages.

-- no debconf information

Reply via email to