Tony Nelson writes: : The reason seems weak to me, but test does not require a closing square : bracket, while [ does, and: : : At 6:22 PM +0200 5/11/07, Stepan Kasal wrote: : >Hi, : > : >On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 04:44:39PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote: : >> single square brackets, I thought "[" was a symlink to the : >> coreutils "test" command, [..] : > : >AFAIK, it used to be hard link, not symlink. : > : >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 32168 Apr 17 13:48 /usr/bin/[ : >> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 29544 Apr 17 13:48 /usr/bin/test : > : >GNU Coding Standards now declare that the behaviour of binary : >should not depend on its name. The new coding standards put quite a crimp in the use of /sbin/busybox, /sbin/lvm, and a lot of other useful linux modules, I would think. What's the rationale behind this standard? I've written several useful pieces of signal processing code whose behaviour depends on the name one uses to call it. Now, self-modifying code---that I can understand. :-) Dean -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
