> For the record, ": foo" is a not entirely uncommon alternative way to > write comments in Bourne shell it's also the only way to squeeze a > comment and a trailing ";;" onto a single line.
Wow, I've never seen that outside DOS.bat scripts, but yes, it does that. You can't have a comment following the ";;" part? > > *[^:]:) PATH="$PATH:" ;; > > That isn't valid POSIX shell [...] So you need "*[!:]:" there. Cool, I didn't know that. Are most Bourne implementations compliant with that? I've dealt with a lot of Bourne and korn implementations and never had a problem with [^x] before, nor had I ever seen "[!x]" . The linked clarification (IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, Section 9.3.5) seems a bit unnecessary to me, but that's clearly not up for debate here. > This mistake results in a regression. Using bash (it's possibly worth > noting that dash doesn't implement a trailing colon in PATH correctly): Dash does it correctly for me ... % dash $ mkdir /tmp/testpath $ cd /tmp/testpath $ echo '#!/bin/true' > testme $ chmod +x testme $ if PATH=/ testpath; then echo "yes to standard path"; fi $ if PATH=/: testpath; then echo "yes to test"; fi I don't have relative paths in my $PATH, so the above code returned only "yes to test" which means dash implements this correctly. > Please fix this by changing the pattern to "*[!:]:", or back to the > perfectly good and arguably clearer (if longer) code that was there > before. I'd argue for my alternative; nix the case statement and tack on an extra colon to the end of $PATH when called on line 46, like: for ELEMENT in $PATH:; do The corner cases where it loops an extra time should be extremely rare and not time-consuming anyway. This is much cleaner than my original suggestion (and Colin's). -Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
