Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:49:41 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com> To: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OptionalObsoleteFiles.inc completeness Message-ID: <20120601234940.GB56049@server.rulingia.com> In-Reply-To: <20120601185024.GP10094@acme.spoerlein.net> References: <20120527140541.GL2987@hades.panopticon> <20120528094427.GE2675@aspire.rulingia.com> <20120528195542.GB85856@hades.panopticon> <20120528200403.GB15356@server.rulingia.com> <20120528221825.GB38860@hades.panopticon> <20120530032703.GA99357@server.rulingia.com> <20120531212042.GA43155@server.rulingia.com> <20120601185024.GP10094@acme.spoerlein.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2012-Jun-01 20:50:24 +0200, Ulrich Sp=F6rlein <uqs@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >Why is xargs even calling /bin/echo when "utility" is not specified. Because that's what it's documented as doing. >Shouldn't it just print a certain number of arguments (one in this >case)? The current approach is simpler - there's always "utility" and it defaults to "/bin/echo". Therefore xargs can just always fork/exec. I agree that special-casing the default to have xargs print the relevant number of arguments would be more efficient. --=20 Peter Jeremy --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk/JVRQACgkQ/opHv/APuIcsugCdFmu4rKXwu/RBzSSeDVN4/4ds JkQAoMHzcHr3Gp8myetB/vsFI5j1seMg =Dy3G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ZPt4rx8FFjLCG7dd--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120601234940.GB56049>