|
| ▲ | mahboi 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I use a Mac, so the CLIs are the BSD versions. I don't have any opinion on which is better, but it's just annoying that it's different from GNU, so a lot of my work ends up being on a Linux VM or server instead. POSIX compliance doesn't seem to buy me anything. I like the BSD license though. |
| |
| ▲ | jonhohle 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The GNU versions work fine in macOS. Apple doesn’t want to distribute them, but that’s mean you can’t use them. | | |
| ▲ | duskwuff 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > Apple doesn’t want to distribute them Apple can't distribute them - coreutils is GPLv3, which is incompatible with Apple's immutable system volume. | |
| ▲ | mahboi 22 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Of course, but any script meant for Mac is going to assume Mac core utils, even assume zsh instead of bash. You don't want to be the one person on the team with a non-stock setup. | |
| ▲ | collinfunk an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The GNU versions work fine in macOS. Apple doesn’t want to distribute them, but that’s mean you can’t use them. We also test GNU coreutils on macOS. It is a bit tricky since the other maintainers and I don't own any macOS machines for testing. But we seem to do well enough with a shared system that Adélie Linux kindly allows the compile farm [1] to use, along with some additional CI machines. [1] https://portal.cfarm.net/ |
| |
| ▲ | Y_Y an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sounds like it's Apple who's behind | | |
| ▲ | mahboi 20 minutes ago | parent [-] | | In some cases they are, but that's not the cause for the mismatch vs GNU. |
| |
| ▲ | frumplestlatz an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | If you stick to POSIX, things generally work everywhere. It's not really a question of what is better, just what is portable. | | |
| ▲ | mahboi 15 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I don't know how compatible my Mac will really be with a Free/OpenBSD machine. Last time I tested this theory, some C code I was building on Mac clang didn't build on FreeBSD clang cause I was unknowingly using some extension enabled by default. But that was about 12 years ago. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | greyw 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Thats exactly what I mean. I dont care about Posix or the whining about "anti-features". The BSD stuff is a clear subset that doesnt get the job done. Posix is more an art form documenting the far gone past rather than a practical tool |
| |
| ▲ | Calavar 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What are some GNU coreutil extensions that you find you can't live without? | | |
| ▲ | LtWorf 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The conventions for the long parameters on the command line. |
| |
| ▲ | ninjin 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "[Doesn't] get the job done"? Well, it gets my job done. You are welcome to use whatever you subjectively prefer (I use GNU's date(1) for a few scripts, but would prefer the English date grammar parsing as a tool of its own), but if you are unable to talk about anything in concrete terms there is not point in trying to discuss in good faith and I will just roll my eyes and move on. |
|
|
| ▲ | thomashabets2 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I am not the parent commenter, but I have the same sense that the GNU ones are better. But the only concrete example I can think of is that `cat -n a b`, if `a` doesn't end in a newline, produces something that is obviously not what the user wanted. GNU cat does it right. I didn't report it to the openbsd people because I didn't want them to yell at me that `-n` is nonstandard anyway with no "right" behavior, so I should STFU. Which would be what I'd expect from having reported problems in the past. |
