Re: path_concat proposed cleanup for corutils

[Paul Eggert]

Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm not sure what you intended by the `cd DIR; cat BASE' part
> of the comment for the new path_concat.
>
>    The resulting file name is equivalent to what you would get by
>    running (cd DIR; cat BASE), where BASE is ABASE with any file system
>    prefixes and leading separators removed.

What I was trying to say is that the function returns the name F of a
file, such that the commands 'cat F' and '(cd DIR; cat BASE)' output
the same file.  I see now that it isn't worded very well, though.
Perhaps the following would be better?

   The resulting file name F is such that the commands "ls F" and "(cd
   DIR; ls BASE)" refer to the same file, where BASE is ABASE with any
   file system prefixes and leading separators removed.