On 12/15/15 4:53 AM, konsolebox wrote:
> Ok I accept your point. So it's actually about `source` and `bash
> file`, correct? So would this mean every script I `source` would need
> +x bit now? And if it's not about the +x bit and only about `noexec`,
> would stuff I place that I would want to n
On 12/14/15 2:52 AM, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:
> Hey,
>
> we have had an off--list discussion with Kai on this (to shorten the
> 30 mails we exchanged ;-) I am writing this summary). He solved the
> issue by --without-bash-malloc which could indicate a bug or lack of
> proper support in lib/malloc/
On 12/16/15 2:51 PM, Ish Sookun wrote:
> The form allows multiple votes by the same person. Is that intentional?
Unless you require people to register and provide authentication, you
can't really prevent it.
>> Vote early and vote often! (Wait, that can't be right...)
>>
>
> Aargh! The "vote of
Hi Chet,
On 12/16/2015 11:21 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
We have narrowed the field to three proposed designs, and it is time for
the bash community to decide on the winner.
Thanks for sharing and including the community to vote :)
There is a Google form with the proposed new logo designs where
On 12/16/15 3:29 PM, John McKown wrote:
> FWIW (not much), I'm going to go with Chet on this. It may be my ignorance
> speaking, but what can I do in a BASH shell script which I cannot do (at
> all) just by entering the commands by hand?
That's where the scope of the proposal makes a difference.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/14/15 12:32 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 13 Dec 2015 17:24, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 12/12/15 4:01 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> Today, if you have a script that lives on a noexec mount point, the
>>> kernel will reject attempts to run it direct
FWIW (not much), I'm going to go with Chet on this. It may be my ignorance
speaking, but what can I do in a BASH shell script which I cannot do (at
all) just by entering the commands by hand?
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Chet Ramey wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/14/15 12:17 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> (1) the examples i already provided do not involve the user at all, and
> include systems where the user has no direct access to the shell.
You didn't really provide any examples. You mentioned Chr
On Wed, 16 Dec 2015, Chet Ramey wrote:
For many years, my bash page (tiswww.case.edu/~chet/bash/bashtop.html) has
sported a bash logo that someone whose name I have lost donated long ago.
I received a very generous offer to create a new logo and donate it for
the project's use. The benefactor
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:03 PM, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:
> one thing I missed for some time now, is the ability to access the
> argument passed to test, or any argument on the right hand side.
> I needed it so I made a quick hack, which I attach as a reference.
> It allows to access arg in the
On 12/15/15 12:04 PM, up201407...@alunos.dcc.fc.up.pt wrote:
> $ bash --version
> GNU bash, version 4.2.53(1)-release (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
>
> Or did you just patch it, since you used "../bash-4.3-patched/bash ./x19" ?
No. bash-4.3-patched/bash is bash-4.3.42 (to distinguish it from bash-4
For many years, my bash page (tiswww.case.edu/~chet/bash/bashtop.html) has
sported a bash logo that someone whose name I have lost donated long ago.
I received a very generous offer to create a new logo and donate it for
the project's use. The benefactor is Justin Dorfman, and he has been
very pa
On 12/16/15 10:03 AM, Piotr Grzybowski wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> one thing I missed for some time now, is the ability to access the
> argument passed to test, or any argument on the right hand side.
> I needed it so I made a quick hack, which I attach as a reference.
> It allows to access arg in t
2015-12-16 16:03:14 +0100, Piotr Grzybowski:
> Dear All,
>
> one thing I missed for some time now, is the ability to access the
> argument passed to test, or any argument on the right hand side.
> I needed it so I made a quick hack, which I attach as a reference.
> It allows to access arg in th
Dear All,
one thing I missed for some time now, is the ability to access the
argument passed to test, or any argument on the right hand side.
I needed it so I made a quick hack, which I attach as a reference.
It allows to access arg in the the -f $arg easily, e.g.:
[ -f /tmp/myfile ] && { echo
Quoting "Chet Ramey" :
Which should not be affected by what we're talking about, which is not
importing PS4 from the environment when uid == 0.
He later said "(Blocking PS4 and not SHELLOPTS=xtrace would work for
me in that
regard)".
Still shows how useful xtrace is and how it is necessa
16 matches
Mail list logo
