Hello,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 23:44:22 +
"brian m. carlson" wrote:
> > Well, as far as I know, mawk has some sort of terrible UTF-8
> > support, so it's a no way for many applications.
> Could you please explain? And if you haven't filed a bug report,
> could you please do so? Searching Goog
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:23:45PM +, brian m. carlson wrote:
> If your script does require some feature that is not available in mawk
> or original-awk, you explicitly need to call gawk, since /usr/bin/awk is
> an alternative and you cannot assume that it will point to gawk.
I wonder, would a
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 07:59:14AM +0100, Andrew Shadura wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 23:23:45 +
> "brian m. carlson" wrote:
>
> > I've seen a lot of cases over the years of packages depending on gawk
> > that do not need it. If you only need a standard nawk (new awk), you
> > do not need to
Hello,
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 23:23:45 +
"brian m. carlson" wrote:
> I've seen a lot of cases over the years of packages depending on gawk
> that do not need it. If you only need a standard nawk (new awk), you
> do not need to depend on gawk. mawk is smaller and faster and
> sufficient for al
I've seen a lot of cases over the years of packages depending on gawk
that do not need it. If you only need a standard nawk (new awk), you do
not need to depend on gawk. mawk is smaller and faster and sufficient
for almost all needs, and the existence of some awk on the system is
guaranteed by ba
5 matches
Mail list logo
