On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:02:30AM +0200, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> Matthias Kilian <k...@outback.escape.de> writes:
> > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:51:17PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:01:33PM +0200, Alexander Hall wrote:
> >> > I for one don't see a general interest in knowing ones parents
> >> > potentially faked wd. You can find out your wd by saner means.
> >>
> >> There is no way to find the logical path without help from the shell.
> >
> > But if anything relies on the "logical" path, isn't something broken?
>
> I do agree that relying on ksh's magic is at best weird (I can't see
> a real use case right now). But the fact is that all shells I've tested
> (bash, ksh93, dash) do export PWD by default (ok, not ksh88...).
> Do we really ant to be different from almost other shells?
Until somebody explains why exporting PWD by default is superior
to *not* exporting it, I prefer our shell to be different, yes.
I already think that the PWD magic on shell startup is very dubious,
but hey, it's POSIX, so it must be good.
cd /some/where/with/a/symlink/in/it
run some script making assumptions about the "logical path"
boom
(yes, that script would be wrong, but if every shell exports PWD
by default, nobody will notice that the script is wrong)
Ciao,
Kili
