Re: GNU/Linux stance by Richard Stallman

Khimenko Victor (
Mon, 5 Apr 1999 19:09:56 +0400 (MSD)

In <> Guest section DW ( wrote:
GD> From: "Khimenko Victor" <>

>> It's BROKEN -- it breaks the semantics of true(1) and false(1), which
>> among other things is that they ignore any arguments. Hence it is a
>> BUG.

GD> It can be called BUG ONLY if you can show some POSIX specification where
GD> said that true(1) and false(1) must ignore any arguments. Till not shown
GD> otherwise it's FEATURE. You can like or dislike this FEATURE but you can
GD> not clain that it's BUG !

GD> Hmm - probably I shouldnt answer, but now that I have POSIX.2 here next to me:

GD> 4.23 false:
GD> Options: None.
GD> Operands: None.
GD> Exit Status: The false utility always shall exit with a value other than zero.

GD> Since GNU false sometimes does `exit 0' it certainly is not POSIX compliant.

GNU false ALWAYS "exit with value other then zero" when called without options
and operands. I can not see how text above imply that false should IGNORE
arguments. If such thing as additional arguments not specified by POSIX are
bugs then [almost] all GNU utilities are buggy: most of them will allow
additional arguments.

When GNU true and false used according to POSIX (i.e. without arguments) then
work like POSIX specify.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at