Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Feb 3, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The question is `is $FILE an executable in the common sense'.
>
> I think the best thing to do is to just ignore the issue of whether
> the found executable is a directory while testing -x or -f, and test
> for -d later on, notifying the user and possibly aborting. This
> second test might have false positives on Cygwin if x/ and x.exe
> exist, but I really don't care. I'd rather warn the user that
> something bad is about to happen.
>
> As a data point to support this choice, directories aren't generally
> skipped when searching the PATH. So why should we?
What do you mean?
/tmp % mkdir executable nostromo 17:43
/tmp % PATH=/tmp which executable nostromo 17:43
executable not found
/tmp % which -a which nostromo Err 1
which: shell built-in command
/usr/bin/which
/tmp % PATH=/tmp /usr/bin/which executable nostromo 17:44
/tmp/executable
Arg... Is this really good? Are there any other PATH walking
programs behaving like this?
