Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> writes: > Note that the unquoted version on line 3 is not warned about. Not sure > if this is due to the subshell or the implicit nested quotes..
To distinguish, I've made another test case. Attached to this message
#! /bin/sh printf "%s %s\n" "command-not-quoted" "list-not-quoted" . $(printf "lorem %s\n" foo bar baz) printf "%s %s\n" "command-not-quoted" "list-quoted" . $(printf "lorem %s\n" "foo bar baz") printf "%s %s\n" "command-quoted" "list-not-quoted" . "$(printf "lorem %s\n" foo bar baz)" printf "%s %s\n" "command-quoted" "list-quoted" . "$(printf "lorem %s\n" "foo bar baz")"
That causes two warnings from ‘checkbashisms’: ===== $ checkbashisms ./870309.test.sh possible bashism in ./870309.test.sh line 10 (sourced script with arguments): . "$(printf "lorem %s\n" foo bar baz)" possible bashism in ./870309.test.sh line 13 (sourced script with arguments): . "$(printf "lorem %s\n" "foo bar baz")" ===== So, it complains when the argument to ‘.’ is a quoted command substitution, but not when it's an unquoted command substitution. -- \ “I busted a mirror and got seven years bad luck, but my lawyer | `\ thinks he can get me five.” —Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney <bign...@debian.org>
