Re: can't compile bash 4.1 under Solaris 8/9

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 12:22:12PM +0100, Yann Rouillard wrote: ./printf.def:175: error: conflicting types for 'vsnprintf' Maybe you could first send me the config.log/config.h generated on Solaris 8 so I can compare with mine ? It might be more useful to compare your stdio.h header file

Re: can't compile bash 4.1 under Solaris 8/9

Greg Wooledge a écrit : On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 12:22:12PM +0100, Yann Rouillard wrote: ./printf.def:175: error: conflicting types for 'vsnprintf' Maybe you could first send me the config.log/config.h generated on Solaris 8 so I can compare with mine ? It might be more useful to compare

Re: can't compile bash 4.1 under Solaris 8/9

On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:03:19AM -0500, Chet Ramey wrote: *** ../bash-4.1/builtins/printf.def 2009-11-20 15:31:23.0 -0500 --- builtins/printf.def 2010-01-07 08:50:06.0 -0500 *** *** 173,177 #if !HAVE_VSNPRINTF ! extern int vsnprintf __P((char

Re: can't compile bash 4.1 under Solaris 8/9

Also works perfectly for Solaris. I can now compile bash 4.1 under Solaris 8 or 9. Thanks for answer. Yann Greg Wooledge a écrit : On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:03:19AM -0500, Chet Ramey wrote: *** ../bash-4.1/builtins/printf.def 2009-11-20 15:31:23.0 -0500 --- builtins/printf.def

[PATCH] Ensure the command found in the hash table exists, not only on POSIXLY_CORRECT

Hello, what do you think about make this the default behavior, not only when POSIXLY_CORRECT is specified? A `stat' is very fast, the cost of a stat+fork+exec is almost the same of a fork+exec. This is the test case I used, I expect to get hello world twice:

Re: [PATCH] Ensure the command found in the hash table exists, not only on POSIXLY_CORRECT

On 1/7/10 8:39 AM, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote: Hello, what do you think about make this the default behavior, not only when POSIXLY_CORRECT is specified? A `stat' is very fast, the cost of a stat+fork+exec is almost the same of a fork+exec. If you want to make this your default behavior,

Re: [PATCH] Ensure the command found in the hash table exists, not only on POSIXLY_CORRECT

Thanks for your answer. Chet Ramey chet.ra...@case.edu writes: I have a question: how bash should behave in the case you have: --- export PATH=a:b:$PATH mkdir a b cat b/prog.sh EOF echo b/prog.sh EOF chmod +x b/prog.sh prog.sh cat

Re: [PATCH] Ensure the command found in the hash table exists, not only on POSIXLY_CORRECT

On 1/7/10 5:30 PM, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote: the code I have attached is just a test case that actually, AFAICS, can't be fixed without change its code. This situation can be present in a shell script that potentially can rely on the PATH elements precedence. Is there a way to disable