Re: weird bug in small for loop and here documents and bash-4.x

2010-03-22 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Monday 22 March 2010 21:47:53 Chet Ramey wrote: > The attached patch fixes it for me. Let me know. that seems to work for me too, thanks -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: manpage error-Arithmetic Evaluation of numbers with explicit base

2010-03-22 Thread Chet Ramey
On 3/22/10 9:13 AM, tbart...@gmx-topmail.de wrote: > Bash Version: 4.0 > Patch Level: 35 > Release Status: release > > Description: > The man page seems to be wrong regarding the handling of numbers with > different bases. It states one has to use [base#]n although it seems to be > [base#n]

Re: unicode aware printf \u and \U switches not supported

2010-03-22 Thread Chet Ramey
On 3/22/10 9:24 AM, Thomas Bartosik wrote: > Bash Version: 4.0 > Patch Level: 35 > Release Status: release > > Description: > bash's printf does not understand \u and \U although the man page says it > supports all expressions that printf(1) supports. The man page says the bash printf supp

Re: weird bug in small for loop and here documents and bash-4.x

2010-03-22 Thread Chet Ramey
On 3/22/10 6:21 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > ok, the trouble is that we take the code, save it via `set`, and then restore > it. OK, that was the missing piece. Not really anything to do with the redirection code per se. > the assumption is that what bash outputs is equivalent to the original >

unicode aware printf \u and \U switches not supported

2010-03-22 Thread Thomas Bartosik
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: i686 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/loc

manpage error-Arithmetic Evaluation of numbers with explicit base

2010-03-22 Thread tbartdev
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: i686 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i686' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i686-pc-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/loc

Re: weird bug in small for loop and here documents and bash-4.x

2010-03-22 Thread Mike Frysinger
ok, the trouble is that we take the code, save it via `set`, and then restore it. the assumption is that what bash outputs is equivalent to the original code. bash-4 though does not provide equivalent code. so here is the reduced test case: $ cat test.sh foo() { rm -f a b c for

Re: weird bug in small for loop and here documents and bash-4.x

2010-03-22 Thread Chet Ramey
> > > when i strace bash, i see both files being opened, set to stdout, and > > > then cat executed, but only in the first file (src/assembler.S) does > > > there appear to be any data waiting for cat on stdin. the second file's > > > cat reads stdin and gets back 0 bytes. > > > > > > trying to d

Re: weird bug in small for loop and here documents and bash-4.x

2010-03-22 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Sunday 21 March 2010 21:21:36 Chet Ramey wrote: > On 3/21/10 1:55 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > i have a small bit of code in a function: > > foo() { > > > > local f > > for f in src/assembler.S src/assembler_opt.S ; do > > > > cat <<-EOF >> ${f} > > #ifdef

glitch in an old documentation-example

2010-03-22 Thread Jasper
Hello List, Searching the net for a way to validate user input to be a well-formed floating point number I found this example in the bash documentation, on my system ( Debian-Etch with Bash version 3.1.17 ) it is located here: /usr/share/doc/bash/examples/functions/isnum2 it reads: isnum2()