GNU bug report logs - #20287
doc: improve comm,uniq manuals

Please note: This is a static page, with minimal formatting, updated once a day.
Click here to see this page with the latest information and nicer formatting.

Package: coreutils; Severity: wishlist; Reported by: anti plex <antiplex@HIDDEN>; dated Thu, 9 Apr 2015 18:17:01 UTC; Maintainer for coreutils is bug-coreutils@HIDDEN.
Changed bug title to 'doc: improve comm,uniq manuals' from 'comm does not imply uniq' Request was from Assaf Gordon <assafgordon@HIDDEN> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. Full text available.
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal' Request was from Assaf Gordon <assafgordon@HIDDEN> to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. Full text available.

Message received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org:


Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Apr 2015 18:16:57 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Thu Apr 09 14:16:57 2015
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51424 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1YgH0a-0005UN-At
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:16:56 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36060)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9x-00043J-Nb
 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9n-0000RR-OV
 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:28 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_MESSAGE,
 T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:41717)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9n-0000RN-L6
 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:23 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49566)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9m-00016l-Ch
 for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:23 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9j-0000Qv-6Q
 for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:22 -0400
Received: from mail-ob0-x233.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c01::233]:33719)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <antiplex@HIDDEN>) id 1YgG9i-0000Qj-CU
 for bug-coreutils@HIDDEN; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 13:22:19 -0400
Received: by oblw8 with SMTP id w8so141869624obl.0
 for <bug-coreutils@HIDDEN>; Thu, 09 Apr 2015 10:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=coma.cc; s=gglDKIM;
 h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type;
 bh=lzk+Go7IrZwT8sMMQq8+3SQeoLk+YUZXSEIUdtIZH7A=;
 b=HHxZwPvbGl3BDuDxENeERI0dn88lPC/IWDAQERZzX7ot+IHJ+IzPKwr1Ump47dSbgb
 zjL0rK6TE1MKI1DJC1hqxYulY9cUvvsEfu0wnH3iJRz+jkX0IJgWdBWibBlnVWOVVysN
 F38HtK8oYkwzmj9paesw0jnuJ62tSivJOyFtU=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :content-type;
 bh=lzk+Go7IrZwT8sMMQq8+3SQeoLk+YUZXSEIUdtIZH7A=;
 b=RJ2XdbmiRQeV434Ukwm5iEFaub6gKoskhLwz4eZBHFtm2Z+SWeCF/u/Ptu5ei26yJG
 vq/COctwuTdMs99R42VPryWVQbt1u8o7ihOrdb1jxtxYSLaHxCOA90LH5TKA2beN4wli
 oyZWNufAJ+WKrtHE8aMOPKugM41r1PgaOhw5q/VPKOxgg6MivMff7czY8/xlBufKDhAG
 xuJ+V52QMidpCWbLm8bVq1aUN3PLU56KHSO+fQuCdoY1MmkvHveCx5o/RNaJumd+XaML
 lhSu47AFx35CXmqF+eYxTdw6Y+ihCbNW8Uxel2jp8XsyYRAhiW8yg55yEi5uoQ4wPngu
 aKpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlmYejPBMTTWLPNR1C1vAe8nSAP0w+LAAu7Og2nYDnqPSqP4P4GIjGjG/CQmiweYVneKL9W
X-Received: by 10.182.5.4 with SMTP id o4mr40428360obo.67.1428600135031; Thu,
 09 Apr 2015 10:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.182.43.36 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Apr 2015 10:21:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [93.208.141.52]
From: anti plex <antiplex@HIDDEN>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 19:21:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAD9TOHo03VwuKupKQPHiMpWKmeBSztnj1GHBFw4_NyKMhCj3Qw@HIDDEN>
Subject: comm does not imply uniq
To: bug-coreutils@HIDDEN
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134b02c93371305134de379
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address
 (bad octet value).
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address
 (bad octet value).
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11
X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 09 Apr 2015 14:16:54 -0400
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -5.0 (-----)

--001a1134b02c93371305134de379
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hi there,

This is not meant to be a bug in the classic sense but rather a minor
suggestion for a manpage-improvement.

Albeit being a Linux-user for some years I've just re-discovered comm to
compare two files with md5-hashes. Some entries (lines) in one file
occurred twice wile being present zero or one time in the other file which
lead to weird results in combination with e.g. '-23' as i expected the
output to be exclusive to file1.
The repetitive use of the word 'unique' in the manpage ('Column one
contains lines unique to FILE1, column two contains lines unique to FILE2,
and column three contains lines common to both files.') further lured me to
think in this direction.

Thinking further about the behaviour of comm in the light of "Compare
sorted files FILE1 and FILE2 line by line." being mentioned in the manpage
one could induce that duplicate lines will be seen as differences of
course. Still, some additional hint just like mentioning that comm expects
each file to be sorted would have helped me to avoid some headaches ;)

Therefore I'd like to suggest to add a short hint such as 'Note that comm
does not imply checking for repetitive lines in either file so consider
some form of uniq-ification if expecting entries in each output-column to
be exclusive'.

Thanks for providing such a wonderful toolset,
regards, antiplex

--001a1134b02c93371305134de379
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>Hi there,<br><br></div>This is no=
t meant to be a bug in the classic sense but rather a minor suggestion for =
a manpage-improvement.<br><br></div><div>Albeit being a Linux-user for some=
 years I&#39;ve just re-discovered comm to compare two files with md5-hashe=
s. Some entries (lines) in one file occurred twice wile being present zero =
or one time in the other file which lead to weird results in combination wi=
th e.g. &#39;-23&#39; as i expected the output to be exclusive to file1.<br=
></div><div>The repetitive use of the word &#39;unique&#39; in the manpage =
(&#39;Column one contains lines unique to FILE1, column two contains lines =
unique to FILE2, and column three contains lines common to both files.&#39;=
) further lured me to think in this direction.<br></div><div><br></div>Thin=
king further about the behaviour of comm in the light of &quot;Compare sort=
ed files FILE1 and FILE2 line by line.&quot; being mentioned in the manpage=
 one could induce that duplicate lines will be seen as differences of cours=
e. Still, some additional hint just like mentioning that comm expects each =
file to be sorted would have helped me to avoid some headaches ;)<br><br></=
div>Therefore I&#39;d like to suggest to add a short hint such as &#39;Note=
 that comm does not imply checking for repetitive lines in either file so c=
onsider some form of uniq-ification if expecting entries in each output-col=
umn to be exclusive&#39;.<br><br></div>Thanks for providing such a wonderfu=
l toolset,<br></div>regards, antiplex<br><br></div>

--001a1134b02c93371305134de379--




Acknowledgement sent to anti plex <antiplex@HIDDEN>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN. Full text available.
Report forwarded to bug-coreutils@HIDDEN:
bug#20287; Package coreutils. Full text available.
Please note: This is a static page, with minimal formatting, updated once a day.
Click here to see this page with the latest information and nicer formatting.
Last modified: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 02:15:01 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.