[patch #4371] Document interaction of -I with other options

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #4371 (project findutils): Eric Blake had originally said: The documentation for xargs could use several improvements. The Invoking `xargs' section of the info pages do not mention -E or -L, and implies that -I's argument is optional when it is not. Showing the diff

[patch #4340] Set ${NICE:0} value on "su command" clean environments

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
Update of patch #4340 (project findutils): Assigned to:None => jay ___ Reply to this item at: _

[patch #4340] Set ${NICE:0} value on "su command" clean environments

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
Follow-up Comment #1, patch #4340 (project findutils): The nice value should be inherited from the parent process, I think, like this: $ nice ksh -c "sh -c \"sleep 1000\"" & [1] 7091 $ jobs [1]+ Running nice ksh -c "sh -c \"sleep 1000\"" & $ ps -o pid,ppid,nice,args -t PID P

[patch #4371] Document interaction of -I with other options

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
URL: Summary: Document interaction of -I with other options Project: findutils Submitted by: jay Submitted on: Mon 08/29/05 at 09:56 Category: documentation im

[patch #4371] Document interaction of -I with other options

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
Update of patch #4371 (project findutils): Status:None => Postponed ___ Follow-up Comment #1: The patch is large enough to need a copyright assignment; I've asked Andreas if he is willin

Re: xargs documentation

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 10:50:18AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > There you go. [ attached patch ] I have now logged this patch at http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/index.php?func=detailitem&item_id=4371 Regards, James. ___ Bug-findutils mailing list

Re: AFS and findutils

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 06:24:59PM +0200, Stefaan wrote: > I'm reacting to > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-findutils/2005-02/msg00059.html. > > Is the development effort spoken about in this post still going on? > Can I help? I haven't heard anything more about it, but I am still happy to

Re: xargs documentation

2005-08-29 Thread James Youngman
On Sun, Aug 28, 2005 at 09:53:41AM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote: > Yes, the whole area is documented quite sparse, as I found out in > http://bugs.debian.org/325005 however I think Jay might change xargs' > behavior to a more sane one. >