[PATCH] /usr/bin/find posix patch

[Daniel Dickman]

I think something like the following might be needed for 'find' to adhere
to posix a little more closely. The posix spec says that if the mutually
exclusive -H and -L options are both specified, the last one specified
should override the others.

Index: find.1
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/cvs/src/usr.bin/find/find.1,v
retrieving revision 1.74
diff -u -r1.74 find.1
--- find.1 9 Apr 2009 14:30:39 -0000 1.74
+++ find.1 19 Dec 2009 21:48:05 -0000
@@ -138,6 +138,13 @@
.Nm
from descending into directories that have a device number different
than that of the file from which the descent began.
+.Pp
+It is not an error to specify more than one of
+the following mutually exclusive options:
+.Fl H ,
+.Fl L .
+Where more than one of these options is specified,
+the last option given overrides the others.
.El
.Sh PRIMARIES
.Bl -tag -width Ds
Index: main.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /usr/cvs/src/usr.bin/find/main.c,v
retrieving revision 1.25
diff -u -r1.25 main.c
--- main.c 9 Dec 2009 13:59:43 -0000 1.25
+++ main.c 19 Dec 2009 22:20:25 -0000
@@ -75,6 +75,8 @@
switch(ch) {
case 'H':
ftsoptions |= FTS_COMFOLLOW;
+ ftsoptions |= FTS_PHYSICAL;
+ ftsoptions &= ~FTS_LOGICAL;
break;
case 'd':
isdepth = 1;
@@ -84,6 +86,7 @@
break;
case 'h':
case 'L':
+ ftsoptions &= ~FTS_COMFOLLOW;
ftsoptions &= ~FTS_PHYSICAL;
ftsoptions |= FTS_LOGICAL;
break;

[Ingo Schwarze]

Hi Daniel,

Daniel Dickman wrote on Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 07:53:53PM -0500:

> I think something like the following might be needed for 'find' to adhere
> to posix a little more closely. The posix spec says that if the mutually
> exclusive -H and -L options are both specified, the last one specified
> should override the others.

Thank you, i just committed your patch to find/main.c.
I updated the manual in a different way, though.

Yours,
Ingo