I wrote: > So, the ENOEXEC error is a bug in musl. But POSIX does not specify that the > command interpreter for scripts without shebang is /bin/sh; therefore IMHO > it would be good not to make this assumption.
Correction: <https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/exec.html> says "In the cases where the other members of the exec family of functions would fail and set errno to [ENOEXEC], the execlp() and execvp() functions shall execute a command interpreter and the environment of the executed command shall be as if the process invoked the sh utility using execl() as follows: execl(<shell path>, arg0, file, arg1, ..., (char *)0); where <shell path> is an unspecified pathname for the sh utility ..." So, the command interpreter must be sh-compatible; only its file name is unspecified. => We need to change 'useless-if-before-free' not because of POSIX, but only because of the musl bug and/or for systems that are compliant with older versions of POSIX (older than POSIX:2017). Bruno
