X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=fBJ3/SBQWdGmZVtl
	zaWLiJWNa01m2eCgF782Mr7cSVrwvaqGT82yK3wNQ2Fh6wtPxbeq+1feMqGy+neX
	kpS2DLek0cKPQTriiDxjyhruv3ST2/iDofBIxqug8yBqk3x4ONGrSBZEm8/58DOq
	pVXs4z8YGYTaHuNmpjtA/VWjug4=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=ZU7X7hg9S6lFNY9PMmMxU0
	OO+8M=; b=gnUuL3xSP2PDMBTWm6o+ANT24GsIb4tNsJSfQeOUBuWS5n1nq6057q
	AB5Fd2XlwufrAO7y7vimFz+iCEwXp6JBLBdgAlmyJ9oH3U5IdmZqMk68mi3cu7ef
	B8cAFa6pNqBvsbZbaoYOywM7Aw1Kd6zoZ5Ty1oGDNZQPiGB48WJv4=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_20,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=15th, We, metaphysical, H*r:212.227.126
X-HELO:	mout.kundenserver.de
Subject:	Re: cmp missing from base
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<572C697E DOT 1090408 AT towo DOT net> <29250DCF-60A0-4113-9834-25EA744E8F41 AT etr-usa DOT com>
From:	Thomas Wolff <towo AT towo DOT net>
Message-ID:	<572D891C.2040002@towo.net>
Date:	Sat, 7 May 2016 08:20:12 +0200
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<29250DCF-60A0-4113-9834-25EA744E8F41@etr-usa.com>
X-UI-Out-Filterresults:	notjunk:1;V01:K0:MH2nO5klKiw=:0hHS/7csHAJvCo7meIHVcY oAFRqdLXVLY47k9pxUXpykmgL7NBL1desQkC4AYRYrwypUzsnFl/YnEYwLlQcsZSlN/MWbAbA 4j+3DvYBb+sxLbStlMy/++mjRwOO1SGYsEWxQmAy5btwcR+ctDpJ/H5PJSSaABfCIVlWIlZd8 ihzYJXv5MxTBg4zDRsHiYJ776Th+LsVQ989QUxGy3P47wqxjJs+49N9x8W6LXHcDPR3xAQdlm bfad0SODveZzO5Ez4s/h4Lo3J6E7R5Qw1ZOvxHSzcgy/eX1K47kIubhgvtzcTUwciHsaHXbal IR8jNIh+04RTGWTBhy/GP90ruopG10FpH65Qj8jIckolXdSDMbwMBCjSm1QK3qCwvBaP+QDos JUcQHMyRpDp9XIG33D4vFneGJ7n0N84LKTF1LszV/7UaIgsRmtYxNmYb5PrCAPDSBBoBb0Zmi xU0iJYPf3FKpDZ1nFotb67NnUUZAvRAgpRiptHKswBDbnneAt7bfANP9YfD7fnUKDLkW+xCAu UUgs3/6iJi0Ak+3IPus7EUFZRTu9EWEHKZcOKODvD/8LxK3LDIvh5qe5vpMMLrJVT/IExCw2y 1HAfX2iar4gC1BXIbfcnA8+vpkBKEKdduVysjcUPDuNUg1HiN2lSD/lJZ9Fg6UZiEg0ddYLBr 2/C8s9Ok7SdITIAw728O3OfIOzIYfQYyacQJJu2mLV4kYe6XXVW4upAQEyjbfe9Y02rw+q2ol E/3YjVjRMo12Z6XX
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

Am 07.05.2016 um 03:41 schrieb Warren Young:
> On May 6, 2016, at 3:53 AM, Thomas Wolff <towo AT towo DOT net> wrote:
>> after a recent fresh installation of cygwin, I was surprised that `cmp` was missing, which is part of the traditional Unix base commands.
>> I think the diffutils package should be part of the base installation.
> We’ve never really had a hard rule on what is in Base and what isn’t.  It’s always been a judgement call.
>
> I wonder if the rule should just be “POSIX”?  That is, if it’s on this page, it should be in Base:
>
>    http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/idx/utilities.html
>
> That would exclude other things we’ve always excluded, such as Perl.
>
> I’m not suggesting that we make this rule a strict one.  Most importantly, it cannot be an exclusion rule: Cygwin must contain things not in POSIX.  I’m just suggesting that it would be nice if Cygwin were as close to POSIX as practical out-of-the-box.
>
> By that latter, I mean without extra effort other than adjusting some setup.hint files.  I mean, if there is a command on that list that doesn’t even have a Cygwin package, I don’t mean to propose with this rule that someone must go out and package it just to satisfy POSIX.
>
> As a counterexample, that list contains pax(1), which is currently in Archive, not Base, so by that rule, pax(1) should also move to Base.
>
> By that very example, though, I can argue against this proposed rule: as I understand it, pax(1) was added to POSIX at the same time they dropped cpio(1) and tar(1), thinking that by doing so, they’d change existing practice, moving everyone over to pax(1).  That just created a Standard in the XKCD sense:
>
>    https://xkcd.com/927/
Thanks, Warren, for some metaphysical insights :)
Right, there isn't and shouldn't be a strict rule. But maybe there can 
be a guideline, and more a guideline of common practice than of a 15th 
standard. By decade-long practice as a Unix user, I was simply expecting 
cmp to be basic, like I would expect tar. Maybe others would agree with 
that, or maybe not...
Cheers
Thomas

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -