On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 12:10:34AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote: > Eric Blake wrote: > > we now have implementations in the wild that differ in behavior, and > > use security as a reason for the divergence, it is worth getting that > > clarified in POSIX. I'll file a bug against POSIX shortly > > For the reference, the systems that return ENOEXEC for posix_spawnp > attempting to execute a script without #! marker are: > - glibc/Linux ≥ 2.15 > - glibc/Hurd ≥ 2.33 (commit 13adfa34aff03fd9f1c1612b537a0d736ddb6c2b) > - musl libc
POSIX issue now filed as https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1674; although we'll have to see if my wording is acceptable or if it settles on something a bit looser (such as implementation-defined as to whether an sh fallback is attempted, rather than outright forbidden). -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266 Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
