[bug #62230] Doc/behaviour mismatch for -printf %INVALID

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #62230 (project findutils): I suppose that's an alternative, but I don't think that making it explicitly unspecified is the best way to help users. It seems like a way to allow programmers to (unconsciously) shift blame onto any users who "do the wrong thing" and then enc

[bug #62230] Doc/behaviour mismatch for -printf %INVALID

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #62230 (project findutils): There is an argument for making the effect explicitly unspecified (i.e. possibly including a fatal error, or any kind of output) so that in the future new format specifiers can be introduced, and to that people using GNU find don't make assumpt

[bug #62227] Incorrect warning for -name /

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #62227 (project findutils): [comment #3 comment #3:] > So for my understanding: > if 'find / -prune -name /' boils down to 'echo /', then what is > the real use case behind? In that case it does not do anything useful, sure. To get something useful we would need to add m

[bug #62230] Doc/behaviour mismatch for -printf %INVALID

URL: Summary: Doc/behaviour mismatch for -printf %INVALID Project: findutils Submitted by: raf Submitted on: Tue 29 Mar 2022 09:17:07 AM UTC Category: find Severity: 3