On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 05:06:32AM -0500, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> * Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 01:41:47PM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 09:16:43PM +0900, Jonny wrote:
> > > > I don't understand, either.
> > > >
> > > > The output of "set -x":
> > > (...)
> > > > + set -- -a firefox
> > > (...)
> > > > + exec_verbose /usr/lib/iceweasel/firefox-bin firefox
> > > > + verbose Running: /usr/lib/iceweasel/firefox-bin firefox
> > > > + [ ]
> > > > + exec /usr/lib/iceweasel/firefox-bin firefox
> > > (...)
> > >
> > > Obviously the problem is here
> > > > set -- "$@" "-a" "${APPLICATION_ID}"
> >
> > BTW, Eric, I fail to understand why you added these --. To prevent problems
> > when the first argument begins with a dash ? This was already prevented by
> > this:
> > if [ ${first} -eq 1 ]; then
> > set dummy
> > first=0
> > fi
>
> Maybe my shell-fu isn't what it should be, but shouldn't set and set
> -- be equivalent then? I don't understand why this would have changed
> behavior. I just made the change for what I thought was correctness's
> sake.
Damn, the dummy thing is not placed at the appropriate place, so you
actually uncovered a bug of the whole thing... Though... I'm wondering
if set -- is okay with _all_ implementations of /bin/sh...
Well, at least, it does with ash, dash, posh, bash and busybox...
I'll fix this on svn.
Cheers
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
