Should we imitate GNU test's insanity?

Peter Pentchev roam at
Thu Feb 10 08:49:22 UTC 2011

On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 08:46:11PM +0000, Chris Rees wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've found so many cases of autoconf failing when porting Linux apps
> over, for example scilab and musicpd due to the happiness of GNU test
> to accept a == b rather than a = b.
> Rather than making a bug report that'll be brushed off (as my bug
> report for GNU find was), would it be unthinkable for me to make a
> patch for our test to make == acceptable, to stop some wasted porters'
> time?
> Obviously our behaviour is correct [1], I just wonder if we're cutting
> off our noses so as to speak.
> Chris
> [1]

Funny that this should come up right now - just a couple of days ago, a
discussion started on the Austin Group list about extending test(1) with
some widely-used operators.  I wonder if we shouldn't wait a bit to see
how that discussion turns out :)

For the follow-up discussion, see:

(and of course, if anybody knows of another web-based archive for the
Austin Group list that provides an easier way to see the follow-ups,
please share a link :)


Peter Pentchev	roam at roam at peter at
PGP key:
Key fingerprint	FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E  DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
Hey, out there - is it *you* reading me, or is it someone else?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :

More information about the freebsd-standards mailing list