In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Fundakowski
Feldman wrote:
> > Is there something substantially you'd like to contribute to the
> > discussion, like - say - an example where bash-2.03 doesn't work well?
>
> It's definitely broken on some of my scripts before. If you want me
> to go try to find o
>
> Over the last year, I did an extensive amount of testinging on bourne
> shell behaviour. bash2 was the only free sh clone that I never had to
> complain over.
I'm surprised.
>
> Is there something substantially you'd like to contribute to the
> discussion, like - say - an example where bas
On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> > I still think we should *seriously* consider switching to pdksh.
>
> As I said before, pdksh has other bugs.
> Also we would loose all the PRs we received in the past. This testing
> effort by our user base is a valuable resource. From the tests I
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian Fundakowski
Feldman wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 1999, Martin Cracauer wrote:
>
> > > I still think we should *seriously* consider switching to pdksh.
> >
> > As I said before, pdksh has other bugs.
>
> > Also we would loose all the PRs we received in the past. This t
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 03:40:20PM +0100, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> > You can also fool sh into running the *wrong* binary if if you have
> > two in showdowed paths:
>
> pdksh does not suffer from either this problem or the problem that
> started thi
On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 03:40:20PM +0100, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> You can also fool sh into running the *wrong* binary if if you have
> two in showdowed paths:
pdksh does not suffer from either this problem or the problem that
started this thread (and does not coredump). We've shown in the past
You can also fool sh into running the *wrong* binary if if you have
two in showdowed paths:
#! /bin/sh
test -d foo1 || mkdir foo1
test -d foo2 || mkdir foo2
test -d foo2 || mkdir foo3
echo 'echo :one' > foo1/run
echo 'echo :two' > foo2/run
echo 'echo :three' > foo2/run3
chmod a+x */run*
hash -r
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:42:11 +0100, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > > You set all those variables for the first make command, but not for the
> > > > > second. What did you expect to happen?
> > > >
>
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> Martin Cracauer wrote:
> >
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > > It seems to me that when there's a PATH= assignment you don't want to
> > > add anything to the cache or alternatively, clear the cache after
> > > execution of
Martin Cracauer wrote:
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > It seems to me that when there's a PATH= assignment you don't want to
> > add anything to the cache or alternatively, clear the cache after
> > execution of the command having a PATH= assignment.
>
> The first solutio
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> It seems to me that when there's a PATH= assignment you don't want to
> add anything to the cache or alternatively, clear the cache after
> execution of the command having a PATH= assignment.
The first solution is better, but the source messes wi
Martin Cracauer wrote:
>
> OK, the problem is real.
>
> BTW, its worse:
>
> #! /bin/sh
> hash -v
> PATH=/sbin:/bin
> PATH=/foo:/bar:/bin ls
> hash -v
> ls
>
> => coredump
It seems to me that when there's a PATH= assignment you don't want to
add anything to the cache or alternatively, clear th
OK, the problem is real.
BTW, its worse:
#! /bin/sh
hash -v
PATH=/sbin:/bin
PATH=/foo:/bar:/bin ls
hash -v
ls
=> coredump
Working on it.
--
%
Martin Cracauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/
BSD User Group Hambur
Martin Cracauer wrote:
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:42:11 +0100, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > >
> > > > > You set all those variables for the first make command, but not for the
> > > > > second. What did you expec
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> Sheldon Hearn wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:42:11 +0100, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> >
> > > > You set all those variables for the first make command, but not for the
> > > > second. What did you expect to happen?
> > >
> > > That make(1)
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 15:42:11 +0100, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> > > You set all those variables for the first make command, but not for the
> > > second. What did you expect to happen?
> >
> > That make(1) would execute.
>
> But what was the PATH set to _before_ you se
16 matches
Mail list logo
