Interesting observation but I don’t follow how that is related to this issue. The interpreter is not yet running in this case.
On March 17, 2018 at 10:12:54 AM, Brian Vandenberg ( phantall+gnum...@gmail.com) wrote: I cannot remark on pip specifically, but some script interpreters seem to ignore the shebang line if the script is passed as an argument: $ cat /tmp/blah.sh #!/bin/bash printf( "%s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__ ); $ /tmp/blah.sh /tmp/blah.sh: line 2: syntax error near unexpected token `"%s:%d\n",' /tmp/blah.sh: line 2: `printf( "%s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__ );' $ perl /tmp/blah.sh /tmp/blah.sh: line 2: syntax error near unexpected token `"%s:%d\n",' /tmp/blah.sh: line 2: `printf( "%s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__ );' >From the above it's apparent that perl (without extra args) obeys the shebang line; ditto for ruby (example omitted). This next example demonstrates that bash (versions 3.2 and 4.3.33) does not: $ cat /tmp/stuff.sh #!/usr/bin/perl printf( "%s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__ ); $ /tmp/stuff.sh /tmp/stuff.sh:2 $ bash /tmp/stuff.sh /tmp/stuff.sh: line 2: syntax error near unexpected token `"%s:%d\n",' /tmp/stuff.sh: line 2: `printf( "%s:%d\n", __FILE__, __LINE__ );' I've omitted the text, but I ran the same test with sh, csh, tcsh, zsh and python. In summary, when the script is passed as an argument to interpreter: obeyed shebang: perl, ruby ignored shebang: sh, csh, tcsh, zsh, bash, python -brian On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 6:16 AM, David Boyce <david.s.bo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 4:42 AM, <th...@vmware.com> wrote: > >> Casey McGinty writes: >> > Follow-up Comment #2, bug #53201 (project make): >> > >> > See http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/execve.2.html >> > >> > *A maximum line length of 127 characters is allowed for the first line >> in an >> > interpreter script.* >> >> I think this is referring to the '#!' line of a script, not internal >> kernel limits. This limitation should not affect Gnu Make recipes. >> > > Well, the #! limit is a kernel limit too. But your point that it shouldn't > affect GNU make recipes (directly) is a good one since make invokes recipes > via "/bin/sh -c recipe" without ever using a shebang. I have to admit I'm a > little lost on where the shebang limit is coming in here but it does seem > to be somehow. > > > _______________________________________________ > Bug-make mailing list > Bug-make@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make > >
_______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
