Re: 'od' portability problem

[Paul Eggert]

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

> These days I stumbled across a portability pitfall with POSIX 'od', while
> writing an autoconf macro. How about documenting it in autoconf?

OK, thanks, but the latest Mac OS X man page says the problem no
longer exists:
<http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Darwin/Reference/ManPages/man1/od.1.html>

I installed this.  If you happen to know when the problem was fixed we
can update the version info.

2006-05-02  Paul Eggert  <address@hidden>
        and Bruno Haible  <address@hidden>

        * doc/autoconf.texi (Limitations of Usual Tools): Add a paragraph
        about 'od'.

--- doc/autoconf.texi   2 May 2006 03:20:26 -0000       1.1009
+++ doc/autoconf.texi   3 May 2006 00:30:24 -0000       1.1010
@@ -13138,6 +13138,22 @@ exec > foo
 rm -f foo
 @end example
 
+
address@hidden @command{od}
address@hidden ---------------
address@hidden @command{od}
+
+In older versions of Mac OS X, @command{od} does not support the
+standard Posix options @option{-A}, @option{-j}, @option{-N}, or
address@hidden, or the @acronym{XSI} option @option{-s}.  The only
+supported Posix option is @code{-v}, and the only supported
address@hidden options are those in @option{-bcdox}.  The BSD
address@hidden program can be used instead.
+
+This problem no longer exists in Mac OS X 10.4.6; we don't know when it
+was fixed.
+
+
 @item @command{sed}
 @c ----------------
 @prindex @command{sed}