Talk:List of POSIX commands

Linux High‑importance

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as High-importance).

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

No trace[edit]

strace is not on the list. 190.157.245.114 (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strace does not beling into that list. Strace is just a OSS reimplementation of the SunOS-4.0 trace command and strace is not part of the POSIX standard. Schily (talk) 12:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'read' command?[edit]

read was listed as a command in the list. But I cannot find a single source which tells read is a unix command. It is a shell builtin in many linux shells. However, if someone wants to revert the change, please add a trustworthy source stating read a unix command. canaar (talk) 15:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Read the POSIX standard, read must be available as command that can be called via exec(). Schily (talk) 17:18, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Spl (Unix)[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was don't merge. Dan Bloch (talk) 04:10, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its a dictionary definition of a computer term that is now practically historical. Dysklyver 13:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Besides that, it lies outside the scope of this topic (and given the poor sourcing and absence of notability for that topic, someone should simply delete it) TEDickey (talk) 20:00, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge, given that, as Tedicky notes, it lies out of the scope of List of Unix commands given that it refers to kernel routines. I'd also keep rather than delete Spl (Unix) as it is referenced better than many short articles, and referencing is in-proportion to the text length. Klbrain (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Questions[edit]

1. What is the rationale for using IEEE Std 1003.1-2008 as the justification for what to include as a "UNIX command"? I'm not questioning this decision: it's just unclear why, of all of the standards & authorities out there, this was selected. Considering that the only UNIXs still in active use & support are the BSDs & maybe Solaris -- Linux is "UNIX-like" -- the relevance of this standard is debatable. On the other hand, is there any other source one could use to include/exclude commands? (For example, a list of commands included out-of-box with the major BSD & commercial UNIX versions.)

Please see the long arguments about this above. Many people, including me, think that the rationale used here what is a Unix command is broken. Now even more than a decade ago when these arguments started, it is obvious that "Unix" is not the name of any current system, but rather the name of a family tree of historic systems. "Unix commands" should be a list of commands that existed on these historic systems - not commands which some modern standard decided to standardize or that are considered useful today. We could have a separate list of commands standardized by some specific standard - but the "List of Unix commands" should be about the commands available on classic systems actually called "Unix". Nyh (talk) 08:37, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Then the fact that this article is part of wikiproject linux is questionable too... Regards, Comte0 (talk) 09:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2. In the column "Status" there is a code after the words "Obsolete" & "Optional". What does this code signify?

-- llywrch (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

q* relevant?[edit]

Is the Portable Batch System really relevant? -- Polluks ★ 15:30, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not (the topic gives no indication that it's relevant to this one) TEDickey (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]