Re: -ok not totally OK

2008-11-08 Thread jidanni
JY> If you would like to propose an illustrative problem for which JY> your workaround is the most effective solution, we can probably JY> include that in the documentation as an example. OK, please mention something like: -ok in contrast to -exec, has its stdin redirected for various reasons. To

[bug #24748] updatedb

2008-11-08 Thread James Youngman
Update of bug #24748 (project findutils): Severity: 3 - Normal => 1 - Wish ___ Follow-up Comment #1: If you look at the menu bar at the top of this page, one of the items is "Source Code". The

[bug #24561] find -ok should not redirect stdin

2008-11-08 Thread James Youngman
Update of bug #24561 (project findutils): Release: 4.5.2 => 4.2.12 ___ Follow-up Comment #2: If we're not complying with POSIX, then we do need to fix this. The problem appears to affe

Re: -ok not totally OK

2008-11-08 Thread James Youngman
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 7:30 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, but considering >> A workaround to revive stdin on -ok is: -ok true \; -exec > Will you > A. Clamp down stdin on -exec too, for my own good; or > B. Mention the workaround on the man page; or > C. Stop clamping stdin on -ok, as peop

Re: tiny typo fix

2008-11-08 Thread James Youngman
Applied; thanks. On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From 9dbe9a747a2330a09d9fab04a39bb9c3de40fc19 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:49:47 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] README-CVS: fix a tiny typo > > -