#11790: `sage --sh -c ...` shouldn't print [that many] messages
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
Reporter: leif | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: minor | Milestone: sage-4.7.2
Component: scripts | Keywords: subshell commands sage-sage
environment batch mode stdout
Work_issues: | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Author: John Palmieri
Merged: | Dependencies: #11866
-----------------------+----------------------------------------------------
Comment(by leif):
Replying to [comment:4 jhpalmieri]:
> Replying to [comment:3 leif]:
> > The code testing for `-c` could be moved up, since everything else (in
the `case ... esac`) is useless in this case .
>
> Well, if you're running "sage --sh CMD", it should matter whether you're
running "bash" or "bash --norc", right? The `case ... esac` stuff sets
shell options like `--norc` in addition to the prompt, and I think we want
this.
Any shell called with `-c` '''must not''' execute any rc files.
[[BR]]
> > Also, if `exec` returns, this means an error, so we could print some
according message in this case (although ''hopefully''^TM^ the shell
itself did).
>
> So are you suggesting not checking the status at all? Like this:
{{{
#!diff
diff --git a/sage-sage b/sage-sage
--- a/sage-sage
+++ b/sage-sage
@@ -518,8 +518,8 @@ PS1="SAGE_ROOT=${SAGE_ROOT}
esac
if [ "$1" = '-c' ]; then
exec $SHELL_NAME $SHELL_OPTS "$@"
- status=$?
- exit $status
+ echo "An error seems to occurred." 1>&2
+ exit 1
fi
# -c is not the first option, so print informative messages...
echo "" 1>&2
}}}
> I could probably come up with a more cryptic message, though.
:)
I rather meant something like
{{{
#!sh
...
SHELL_NAME=`basename $SHELL`
if [ "$1" = "-c" ]; then
exec "$SHELL_NAME" "$@"
# If 'exec' returns, an error occurred:
status=$?
echo >&2 "Fatal error: 'exec \"$SHELL_NAME\" \"$@\"' failed!"
exit $status # Always non-zero, but return the code the shell
gave.
fi
case $SHELL_NAME in
...
}}}
[[BR]]
Btw., any reason to call `$SHELL_NAME` instead of `$SHELL`?
The latter would IMHO be correct.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11790#comment:6>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
