[Toybox] [PATCH] getconf: add pathconf(3) variables.

[enh]

On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 12:41 PM enh <enh at google.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 11:18 AM Rob Landley <rob at landley.net> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/02/2018 06:21 PM, enh wrote:
> > > (in case it's not obvious, this is on top of my other getconf patch
> > > from earlier today.)
> >
> > Applied, but:
>
> forgot to push?
>
> > 1) getconf -l only outputting symbol names was intentional, it's that whole
> > "unix way" Mike Gancarz wrote a loely book about. Output that's easily tool
> > processable, so you can do "for i in $(getconf)" for example. (Toybox produces
> > just the command names for the same reason.) I understand your motivation for
> > changing that, but it makes me wince.
>
> my motivation was "how else do we explain which ones are pathconf?", which you need to know because all the others require 0 args, but pathconf requires 1 arg. it didn't seem reasonable to do that in --help, and although i considered something like adding '*' to the pathconf ones, that breaks the traditional unix style that you were going for but without actually fixing my problem...

actually, the other reason why i did what i did was: it points you at
the right documentation for each one. because no documentation for
getconf(1) itself is likely to be very helpful.

> > 2) I missed that upstream has the "-a" option which lists everything, which is
> > why they don't have a -l. (I don't think ubuntu 14.04 had this, but my test
> > system died.) We should probably implement that, I might take a stab this weekend.
>
> not _everything_ --- just the ones that are defined (and i'm guessing it uses '.' for the pathconf ones?).
>
> but i can do that while you do something more useful :-) i'll fix the "undefined" behavior too, since i found one caller that was expecting it... (but i'll wait for you to push first, in case you'd made additional changes.)
>
> > Rob