Michael McConville <[email protected]> writes: > Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> Jason McIntyre <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 04:03:16AM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote: >> >> Jason McIntyre wrote: >> >> > the trouble is i think there are some known bugs with ksh. i >> >> > think it probably would be better to keep a note of them in a >> >> > separate file, as is done now. i'm not really sure if we want to >> >> > try and clutter the page with every bug we find. >> >> >> >> this particular bug seemed likely to hurt people. i think it will >> >> save people time to document it. >> > >> > yes, fair enough. >> >> It's not a bug so I'd rather add it to CAVEATS. > > Why not? I don't know much shell trivia.
Huh. It's an implementation detail, you just can't rely on the result. In pdksh, the 'read' builtin in the pipeline is ran in a subshell - which can't affect the value of the "a" variable in its parent. Other POSIX-compliant shells behave the same as pdksh, eg. ports/shells/dash. As I said there is no bug, so if you want to document it, BUGS does not make sense to me. >> Also "Since time immemorial" looks superfluous. > > Maybe a cute way of phrasing it, but I though it worthwhile to briefly > mention that this has been around for >20 years. It suggests that it's > well-known and not easy to fix (or, as you say, not a bug at all). If the manpage mentions it then it is well-known, right? Also I'd rather *say* that it is not a bug, rather than trying to suggest it. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
