mark obsolete usage of fold

[John Kelly]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 22:26:10 +0100 (CET), Peter S Mazinger
<ps.m at gmx.net> wrote:

>> Since an extern __progname is already available, changing error.c to
>> output the basename of __progname gets the coreutils tests working
>> right.  Otherwise, many of them fail due to the simple fact that the
>> tests expect to see the program name in the output.

>You understood/reacted wrong imho. uClibc does not want to be GNU 
>compliant. it tries only to be SuSv3 compliant. There are no GNU 
>extensions expected to be added (ask Erik, he may decide otherwise), those 
>being already there are probably because w/o them you can't really use 
>uClibc in real world.

If your "real world" includes GNU coreutils tests, uclibc is not
usable.


>Come up w/ a patch that is option guarded (CONFIG_GNU_COMPAT?)

Printing the program name in the error.c message is a trivial change,
hardly an "extension."  But it makes a big difference if you want to
run coreutils tests.


>I can imagine it either be added, or begin putting proposed stuff
>somewhere into the repository.

I've solved the problem for myself, so I'll just maintain my own
patches, and the uclibc devs can stay in their comfort zone.