4 ms·

No, please don't! At least, not if you aren't equipped to handle the fallout yourself and not until these tools are further refined! I'm a fish-shell developer

No, please don't! At least, not if you aren't equipped to handle the fallout yourself and not until these tools are further refined! I'm a fish-shell developer and I just dealt with a user that was getting bizarre test failures. Turns out the developers didn't account for basic things like the normalcy of `cat` having its output fd closed mid-stream (e.g. you are piping cat to something and that something exits before cat does) and their vesrion bails with an exception dumped to stderr instead of silently closing with a non-zero exit code.

pixelbeat 2y ago
Sounds like a case of: https://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/sigpipe_handling.html https://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/sigpipe_handling.html uutils uses the coreutils test suite, so it makes sense to add a test case for that, which uutils will eventually get to. I'll do that now.
photonbeam 2y ago
It’s somewhat inevitable that something will try to replace the C implementation of coreutils. Hopefully uutils will fix whichever bugs are reported upstream to lower the compatibility load though
- initplus 2y ago
  At least it's somewhat possible to reliably test behavior of these against GNU coreutils. Pull down some archaic C++ project with a pile of janky shell scripts involved in the build (Chromium might be a good target) and compare final results.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
    One could argue that building Gentoo is an excellent way to exercise things:) Which, granted, is kinda cheating since you could just `emerge chromium` or whatever... but IMHO even just making portage itself happy is a good first step.
- lionkor 2y ago
  Why? Are you unhappy with the IMO very good test coverage, or has it not been working well for you the past checks notes decades?
  - tadfisher 2y ago
    Author didn't state a preference either way, but why do you care? Nothing is wrong with a reimplementation, as using it will nail down any untested/undocumented behavior of the original code.

pixelbeat 2y ago

Sounds like a case of: https://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/sigpipe_handling.html https://www.pixelbeat.org/programming/sigpipe_handling.html uutils uses the coreutils test suite, so it makes sense to add a test case for that, which uutils will eventually get to. I'll do that now.

photonbeam 2y ago

It’s somewhat inevitable that something will try to replace the C implementation of coreutils. Hopefully uutils will fix whichever bugs are reported upstream to lower the compatibility load though

initplus 2y ago
At least it's somewhat possible to reliably test behavior of these against GNU coreutils. Pull down some archaic C++ project with a pile of janky shell scripts involved in the build (Chromium might be a good target) and compare final results.
- yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
  One could argue that building Gentoo is an excellent way to exercise things:) Which, granted, is kinda cheating since you could just `emerge chromium` or whatever... but IMHO even just making portage itself happy is a good first step.
lionkor 2y ago
Why? Are you unhappy with the IMO very good test coverage, or has it not been working well for you the past checks notes decades?
- tadfisher 2y ago
  Author didn't state a preference either way, but why do you care? Nothing is wrong with a reimplementation, as using it will nail down any untested/undocumented behavior of the original code.