Bug in Bash 2.05b when cross-compiling for MIPS.
* The version number of Bash: Bash 2.05b, but bash 2.x and 3.x are both likely affected. * The hardware and operating system: HOST Linux x86, TARGET Linux MIPS * The compiler used to compile Bash: mips-gcc (GCC) 3.2 * A description of the bug behaviour: $(CC_FOR_HOST) is used to compile mksignames.c, which produces signames.h. Signames.h reflects the names and ordering of signals on the host machine, not the target machine. * A short script or `recipe' which exercises the bug and may be used to reproduce it: simply cross-compile bash for any target arch which does not share 100% the same signals. Examples inlcude: Alpha and x86, Mips and x86, ARM and x86, etc. How to fix? Well, it may be that signal.h in glibc needs to be expanded to define all signals on all Linux systems, and wrap with ifdefs, and then compile (for host, but using the apropos define) mksigname such that it outputs the correct target signames.h. Another solution would be some alternative method for generating a correct signals.h. Here is some example output of how the bash kill command generates incorrect signals on a MIPS platform: # ./testsig & 65 # kill -USR1 65 Caught signal 16 # kill 65 Caught signal 15 # bash bash-2.05b# bash-2.05b# kill -USR1 65 Caught signal 10 bash-2.05b# exit # ___ Bug-bash mailing list Bug-bash@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash
improvement to BASH manpage
I think that the descriptions of AND lists and OR lists in bash(1) could be improved. Here is an excerpt from http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/bash/bash.html: The control operators && and || denote AND lists and OR lists, respectively. An AND list has the form command1 && command2 command2 is executed if, and only if, command1 returns an exit status of zero. An OR list has the form command1 || command2 command2 is executed if and only if command1 returns a non-zero exit status. The return status of AND and OR lists is the exit status of the last command executed in the list. I think that the forms would be less ambiguous and more clear if they were written as: pipeline && list and pipeline || list It would be equally correct to write list && pipeline and list || pipeline but I think that this form is slightly less intuitive. Obviously the surrounding text needs to have references to command1 and command2 replaced. The shell grammar uses the non-terminal "command". I don't immediately see where it is defined. I guess that it is a "simple command" or "compound command". If so, the current definitions of OR lists and AND lists seems wrong because it does not allow for x || y || z or x && y && z or x && y || z ___ Bug-bash mailing list Bug-bash@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash
