Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 3/31/22 12:40 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Mär 31 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: So is this the scenario? If you have echo 1 echo 2 echo 3 history in your history, type ^P^P^P to get back to the `echo 2'. Add `24' to the end, type ^A^F so the cursor is after the `e', then run

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Mär 31 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > So is this the scenario? If you have > > echo 1 > echo 2 > echo 3 > history > > in your history, type ^P^P^P to get back to the `echo 2'. Add `24' to > the end, type ^A^F so the cursor is after the `e', then run > history-search-backward? Hit the `echo 1' and

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 3/31/22 5:14 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: Unfortunately I still see clobbered history lines. When moving to a previous history line, editing it, and then invoking history-search-backward and accepting it, the editing remains on this line (as of before history-search-backward), without a way to

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

Unfortunately I still see clobbered history lines. When moving to a previous history line, editing it, and then invoking history-search-backward and accepting it, the editing remains on this line (as of before history-search-backward), without a way to undo it (the undo list is empty). --

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 3/22/22 10:00 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: I still see clobbered history lines: I took it out. That version isn't in the devel branch yet. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

I still see clobbered history lines: bash-5.2$ history 1 echo 1 2 echo 2 3 echo 3 4 history Type e, *2, bash-5.2$ echo 2 2 bash-5.2$ history 1 echo 1 2 echo 2 3* echo 2 4 history 5 echo 2 6 history Line 3 should not be modified just

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 3/11/22 3:35 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: This is still mixing up undo history: I took it out. I could not make it work the way I wanted it to without more extensive changes to the rest of readline than I was willing to make. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

This is still mixing up undo history: bash-5.2$ history 1 echo 1 2 echo 2 3 echo 3 4 history Type e, , , . bash-5.2$ echo 2 2 bash-5.2$ history 1 echo 1 2 echo 2 3* echo 3 4 history 5 echo 2 6 history Type *4 (move to line 3), . bash-5.2$ echo

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 3/2/22 6:13 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Mär 01 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > >> Thanks. I can easily fix the pointer aliasing issue, but it is not going to >> be identical to incremental search. > > I'm still getting crashes due to double free. Thanks, this was already fixed with some changes

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Mär 01 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > Thanks. I can easily fix the pointer aliasing issue, but it is not going to > be identical to incremental search. I'm still getting crashes due to double free. bash-5.2$ history 1 echo 1 2 history Type e, , , , . bash-5.2$ history 1* echo 1

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 2/27/22 9:30 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > On Feb 17 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > >> Thanks for the report. This is a different issue; some assumptions that the >> change to history-search-{forward,backward} uncovered. > > It's still broken. You get a double free when you modify the line >

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Feb 17 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > Thanks for the report. This is a different issue; some assumptions that the > change to history-search-{forward,backward} uncovered. It's still broken. You get a double free when you modify the line selected by , but then leave it and execute a different line

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 2/16/22 4:42 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Feb 10 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: On 2/10/22 9:53 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Jan 21 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: i. The non-incremental history searches now leave the current history offset at the position of the last matching history entry, like

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Feb 10 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > On 2/10/22 9:53 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> On Jan 21 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: >> >>> i. The non-incremental history searches now leave the current history offset >>> at the position of the last matching history entry, like incremental >>> search. >> That

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 2/10/22 9:53 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Jan 21 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: i. The non-incremental history searches now leave the current history offset at the position of the last matching history entry, like incremental search. That makes history-search-backward significantly less

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Jan 21 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > i. The non-incremental history searches now leave the current history offset >at the position of the last matching history entry, like incremental > search. That makes history-search-backward significantly less useful, because you can no longer use

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

Date:Mon, 24 Jan 2022 12:03:39 -0500 From:Chet Ramey Message-ID: <3aeb9d02-b134-216f-6d11-921e42941...@case.edu> | Except it's not unconditional. You have to accommodate ${x#$'value'} in | the here-document expansion path because "${x#$'value'}" is processed for

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 2:54 PM, Chet Ramey wrote: On 1/22/22 2:51 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Jan 22 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within here-document bodies? $''

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 2022-01-21 at 10:24 -0500, Chet Ramey wrote: > Calling `unset I[@]' or `unset I[*]' for > an indexed array I now removes all the elements without unsetting the > array (identical to `I=()'). I have tried ... I guess the variable name was chosen to make it clear it's an *indexed* array.

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 2:51 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: On Jan 22 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within here-document bodies? $'' is left as-is inside double quotes, why

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 2:24 PM, Sam James wrote: On 22 Jan 2022, at 18:52, Oğuz wrote: 22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey yazdı: Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within here-document

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Jan 22 2022, Chet Ramey wrote: > Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash > handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within > here-document bodies? $'' is left as-is inside double quotes, why should it treated differently in

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

> On 22 Jan 2022, at 18:52, Oğuz wrote: > 22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey yazdı: >> Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash >> handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within >> here-document bodies? > Because it'd be

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey yazdı: > > Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash > handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within > here-document bodies? Because it'd be useless otherwise. Why would anyone use $'' in a

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 1:52 PM, Oğuz wrote: 22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey > yazdı: Because they should behave identically to other forms of quoting that bash handles in here-documents. Why should $'' be different from '' only within here-document

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 1:31 PM, Oğuz wrote: 22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey > yazdı: $'\n' is identical to ' ' Here-document bodies are parsed as if they are within double quotes, and single quotes are not special within double quotes. Okay, it

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

22 Ocak 2022 Cumartesi tarihinde Chet Ramey yazdı: > > $'\n' is identical to > ' > ' > > Here-document bodies are parsed as if they are within double quotes, and > single quotes are not special within double quotes. > Okay, it kinda makes sense. But what is the point of allowing dollar-quotes

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 10:01 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote: bash --posix -c 'read -t1 Thanks for the report. -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRUc...@case.eduhttp://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On 1/22/22 4:09 AM, Oğuz wrote: On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 6:28 PM Chet Ramey wrote: a. Fixed a bug that assigned a value to the variable name supplied as an argument to `wait -p' when there were no jobs. This doesn't seem like it's fixed $ bash -c 'echo $BASH_VERSION; unset foo; for i in

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

bash --posix -c 'read -t1

Re: Bash-5.2-alpha available

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 6:28 PM Chet Ramey wrote: > a. Fixed a bug that assigned a value to the variable name supplied as an >argument to `wait -p' when there were no jobs. This doesn't seem like it's fixed $ bash -c 'echo $BASH_VERSION; unset foo; for i in 1 2 3; do wait -p foo; declare -p

Bash-5.2-alpha available

The first alpha release of bash-5.2 is now available with the URLs ftp://ftp.cwru.edu/pub/bash/bash-5.2-alpha.tar.gz https://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/bash/bash-5.2-alpha.tar.gz and from the bash-5.2-testing branch in the bash git repository