[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001150]: exit status of command substitution not properly specified

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1150 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: ==

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001150]: exit status of command substitution not properly specified

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1150 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: ==

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001150]: exit status of command substitution not properly specified

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1150 == Reported By:kre Assigned To: ===

Re: IEEE 1003.1b-1993 standard

Ty Joe, that will be useful. In a message dated 6/15/2017 4:44:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, gw...@raytheon.com writes: Joe M. I asked the IEEE if they could provide 1003.1b-1993 to The Austin Group, to support the revision of 1003.1-2008, and the IEEE have provided 1003.1b-1993 as

Re: What shell implementations to consider

Joerg Schilling dixit: >mksh needs "-o utf8-mode -o posix" to work as expected. Another clarification here: Only “lksh -o posix” in the C locale is considered to be tracking POSIX. Do *not* set UTF-8 mode in mksh and then complain about differences from the POSIX standard. Similarily, export LC

Re: What shell implementations to consider

Stephane Chazelas dixit: >ksh extensions, as basically mksh is pdksh with a few fixes and “a few”, sure, just way over a decade worth of them, and neither pdksh nor its other derivatives share about 90% of them. Just saying. bye, //mirabilos -- FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactivel

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001149]: missing comma in ls -r description

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1149 == Reported By:stephane Assigned To: ==

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001148]: ls -LS missing similar text as with ls -Lt for symlinks

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1148 == Reported By:stephane Assigned To: ==

IEEE 1003.1b-1993 standard

Joe M. I asked the IEEE if they could provide 1003.1b-1993 to The Austin Group, to support the revision of 1003.1-2008, and the IEEE have provided 1003.1b-1993 as a huge PDF, too large to mail. It is 616 pages, and weighs in at 40.9 Mbytes. Here is the Google Drive link: [https://ssl.gstatic

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001147]: ls -l -F/-p and symlinks

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1147 == Reported By:stephane Assigned To: ==

Re: compound-list

Date:Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:41:29 +0200 From:Joerg Schilling Message-ID: <59429c99.j3ycveab5syr2msh%joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de> First, most of this discussion on what should be implemented (which is another way of saying "allowed by xxx" and probably better as i

Re: compound-list

Date:Thu, 15 Jun 2017 19:04:01 + From:=?UTF-8?B?WWFubiBSw6lnaXMtR2lhbmFz?= Message-ID: | --94eb2c196cf487709d055204557e | Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" | Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable | | I am well aware of the fact that the

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001146]: "total" line in ls -l output

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1146 == Reported By:stephane Assigned To: ==

Re: compound-list

Dear Robert, thank you for your time. Le jeu. 15 juin 2017 à 11:48, Robert Elz a écrit : > Does your implementation also accept > > until a "do" b; done > > as valid? No. > If not why not? The note in Section 2.10.2 says that "quoted strings cannot be recognized as reserved words"

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001143]: cancellation points: contradiction between base definition and rationale

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1143 == Reported By:dstaesse Assigned To: =

Re: compound-list

On 6/15/17 4:12 AM, Yann Régis-Gianas wrote: > For the moment, our implementation will continue to follow the shell > grammar of the POSIX standard (i.e. we will continue to accept "until a do > b; done" as a syntactically valid script. You might consider the implications of the following text fr

Re: compound-list

Stephane CHAZELAS wrote: > > POSIX does not allow > > > > f() cmd > > > > but only > > > > f() { cmd; } > > > > and even the Bourne Shell allows (documents) this only for the case that > > "cmd" is a compound command that (like we discussed) does not allow > > leading I/O redirecti

Re: compound-list

2017-06-15 15:43:43 +0200, Joerg Schilling: [...] > > Since it's not documented either way, it's not a bug. Given that > > zsh supports anonymous functions, like in: > > > > < file () { echo "$@"; cat - "$@"; } ./*.txt > > > > Doing it the way it does now makes more sense. It's never useful > > to

Re: compound-list

Stephane CHAZELAS wrote: > Sorry, correcting my correction. I read the above two quickly. > It seems I was right. In TC1 and before, it does look like > indeed that in > > < file until ... > > That "until" is required to be a WORD as per: > > cmd_word : WORD /* Apply rul

Re: compound-list

Stephane CHAZELAS wrote: > 2017-06-15 13:56:16 +0200, Joerg Schilling: > > Stephane Chazelas wrote: > > > > > One more major issue identified in this thread is that in TC2, > > > the "until" in > > > > > > < file until... > > > > > > or: > > > > > > foo=bar until... > > > > > > is now required

Re: compound-list

2017-06-15 14:06:48 +0100, Stephane CHAZELAS: [...] > TC1>  b. [Not the first word] > TC1> > TC1> If the TOKEN contains the character: > TC1> > TC1>* If it begins with '=', the token WORD shall be > TC1>returned. > TC1> > TC1>* If all the characters preceding '=' form a

Re: compound-list

2017-06-15 13:56:16 +0200, Joerg Schilling: > Stephane Chazelas wrote: > > > One more major issue identified in this thread is that in TC2, > > the "until" in > > > > < file until... > > > > or: > > > > foo=bar until... > > > > is now required to be recognised as the "until" keyword, and > > it's

Re: compound-list

Stephane Chazelas wrote: > One more major issue identified in this thread is that in TC2, > the "until" in > > < file until... > > or: > > foo=bar until... > > is now required to be recognised as the "until" keyword, and > it's not in most shells (an exception is zsh for the first > case). Could

Re: compound-list

2017-06-15 16:58:18 +0700, Robert Elz: > Date:Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:12:37 + > From:=?UTF-8?B?WWFubiBSw6lnaXMtR2lhbmFz?= > > Message-ID: > > > | If my understanding of the situation is correct, the current shell grammar > | accepts more script than common impl

Re: compound-list

Date:Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:12:37 + From:=?UTF-8?B?WWFubiBSw6lnaXMtR2lhbmFz?= Message-ID: | If my understanding of the situation is correct, the current shell grammar | accepts more script than common implementations of POSIX shell and the fix | is not obvio

Re: compound-list

Date:Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:12:37 + From:=?UTF-8?B?WWFubiBSw6lnaXMtR2lhbmFz?= Message-ID: | For the moment, our implementation will continue to follow the shell | grammar of the POSIX standard (i.e. we will continue to accept "until a do | b; done" as a syn

[1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 0001046]: Grammar production if_clause allows "if command then"

The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 0001145. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1046 == Reported By:rillig Assigned To

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001145]: compound-list does not required a terminating semicolon even in compound commands, which is contradictory with implementations.

The following issue has been set as RELATED TO issue 0001046. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1145 == Reported By:yannregisgianas As

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001145]: compound-list does not required a terminating semicolon even in compound commands, which is contradictory with implementations.

A NOTE has been added to this issue. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1145 == Reported By:yannregisgianas Assigned To:

[1003.1(2016)/Issue7+TC2 0001145]: compound-list does not required a terminating semicolon even in compound commands, which is contradictory with implementations.

The following issue has been SUBMITTED. == http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1145 == Reported By:yannregisgianas Assigned To:

Re: compound-list

Thank you Stephane, Robbert and Jilles for your answers. If my understanding of the situation is correct, the current shell grammar accepts more script than common implementations of POSIX shell and the fix is not obvious. I will fill a bug report. For the moment, our implementation will continue