Date:Wed, 02 Feb 2022 17:18:08 -0800
From:L A Walsh
Message-ID: <61fb2d50.7010...@tlinx.org>
| My posix non-conformance issue has to do with bash not starting with
| aliases enabled by default in all default invocations.
If you're using aliases in scripts, then j
i see only two solutions as an option
one option does expand aliases inside safe out of the tree
the other more eval ing
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 02:27 L A Walsh wrote:
>
>
> On 2022/02/02 08:50, Chet Ramey wrote:
> > On 2/2/22 8:25 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I.e. My bash is posix compliant b
On 2022/02/02 08:50, Chet Ramey wrote:
On 2/2/22 8:25 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
I.e. My bash is posix compliant by default w/r/t aliases:
It's not, and that's how this whole issue got started. You're running
bash-4.4. POSIX requires the following to work:
alias switch=case
echo $(switc
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, 21:59 Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 2/2/22 1:40 PM, Martijn Dekker wrote:
> > Op 01-02-22 om 15:23 schreef Chet Ramey:
> >> Historically, bash (and ksh93) has favored the former. Just about all
> the
> >> other shells claiming some sort of POSIX conformance favor the latter
> (all
>
On 2/2/22 1:40 PM, Martijn Dekker wrote:
> Op 01-02-22 om 15:23 schreef Chet Ramey:
>> Historically, bash (and ksh93) has favored the former. Just about all the
>> other shells claiming some sort of POSIX conformance favor the latter (all
>> the ash-based shells, yash, mksh).
>>
>> What are your pl
On 2/2/22 11:14 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
> On 2022/02/01 07:50, Chet Ramey wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Historically some shells used simple parenthesis counting to find the
>> terminating ')' and therefore did not account for aliases. However, such
>> shells never conformed to POSIX, which has always required rec
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, at 9:30 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
> Instead of worrying about effects of dirnames on PS1, one might worry
> about how the directory names were created in the first place, and then
> worry about why one would deliberately 'cd' into such a directory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red
Date:Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:38:30 -0500
From:Chet Ramey
Message-ID: <7c422cbb-bba8-0a57-a565-eeb115120...@case.edu>
| > How accurately can you reconstitute? That is, can you maintain the
| > difference between $(a b) and $( a b ) for example ? How about $(a b) ?
Op 01-02-22 om 15:23 schreef Chet Ramey:
Historically, bash (and ksh93) has favored the former. Just about all the
other shells claiming some sort of POSIX conformance favor the latter (all
the ash-based shells, yash, mksh).
What are your plans here?
I've no current plans. Any remotely plausib
On 2/2/22 8:25 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
> I.e. My bash is posix compliant by default w/r/t aliases:
It's not, and that's how this whole issue got started. You're running
bash-4.4. POSIX requires the following to work:
alias switch=case
echo $(switch foo in foo) echo ok 2;; esac )
and it simply does
On 2/2/22 9:00 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
> I was trying to find parameters to a function that gave an error, so
> I 'turned on' (included my backtracing routine), which showed:
>
> ./24bc: line 46: printf: `txt=\nRed,': not a valid identifier
> STOPPING execution @ "printf ${_:+-v $_} '\x1b[48;2;%s;%s;
On 2/1/22 5:31 PM, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Tue, 1 Feb 2022 15:39:06 -0500
> From:Chet Ramey
> Message-ID: <2816cf78-d7be-b9e1-733d-12427b04c...@case.edu>
>
> | When you say "just parsed," when are aliases expanded?
>
> During lexical analysis, right between when t
And I forgot to say, that obviously for this, aliases need to be
being expanded, if they're not, there cannot possibly be an issue
with aliases, can there?
kre
On 2022/02/01 07:50, Chet Ramey wrote:
"Historically some shells used simple parenthesis counting to find the
terminating ')' and therefore did not account for aliases. However, such
shells never conformed to POSIX, which has always required recursive
parsing (see XCU 2.3 item 5)."
On 2022/02/02 06:43, Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev wrote:
i had gdb new version
---
This is about looking at a backtrace of shell functions in shell
gdb may show a backtrace of shell functions, but gdb isn't
a shell debugger, but one for the source code of bash.
If you look at my backtrace function
my fault misunderstanding then too, sorry too
cheers
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, 15:52 L A Walsh wrote:
>
>
> On 2022/02/02 06:43, Alex fxmbsw7 Ratchev wrote:
> > i had gdb new version
> ---
> This is about looking at a backtrace of shell functions in shell
>
> gdb may show a backtrace of shell functio
the attached text is how it looks like since newly
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 3:35 PM L A Walsh wrote:
>
> I was trying to find parameters to a function that gave an error, so
> I 'turned on' (included my backtracing routine), which showed:
>
> ./24bc: line 46: printf: `txt=\nRed,': not a valid ident
i had gdb new version and then it all displayed already all params to funcs
and stuff
(once seen)
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, 15:35 L A Walsh wrote:
> I was trying to find parameters to a function that gave an error, so
> I 'turned on' (included my backtracing routine), which showed:
>
> ./24bc: line 4
Op 02-02-22 om 13:25 schreef L A Walsh:
I can't say for sure, but it would be interesting if anyone else
has this result in a bash with aliases on by default:
I.e. My bash is posix compliant by default w/r/t aliases:
env -i /bin/bash --noprofile --norc
bash-4.4$ shopt -p expand_aliases
Of c
BTW, thinking about how this problem would arise
On 2022/01/20 22:43, Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
Depends what you consider to be an issue. Personally, I would be
less than pleased if my whole terminal turned red just because I
changed into a directory that happened to have a weird name.
S
Date:Wed, 02 Feb 2022 05:25:30 -0800
From:L A Walsh
Message-ID: <61fa864a.7090...@tlinx.org>
| On 2022/01/31 20:40, Martijn Dekker wrote:
| > On the latest code from the devel branch:
| I can't say for sure, but it would be interesting if anyone else
| has th
I was trying to find parameters to a function that gave an error, so
I 'turned on' (included my backtracing routine), which showed:
./24bc: line 46: printf: `txt=\nRed,': not a valid identifier
STOPPING execution @ "printf ${_:+-v $_} '\x1b[48;2;%s;%s;%sm' $1 $2 $3"
in "setBgColor()" at ./24bc #
ive had many inconsistency with bash this regarding exoerienced
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022, 15:00 L A Walsh wrote:
> On 2022/01/31 20:40, Martijn Dekker wrote:
> > On the latest code from the devel branch:
> > GNU bash, versie 5.2.0(35)-alpha (x86_64-apple-darwin18.7.0)
> >
> > Reproducer script:
> >
>
On 2022/01/31 20:40, Martijn Dekker wrote:
On the latest code from the devel branch:
GNU bash, versie 5.2.0(35)-alpha (x86_64-apple-darwin18.7.0)
Reproducer script:
shopt -s expand_aliases
alias let='let --'
set -x
let '1 == 1'
: $(let '1 == 1')
Output:
+ let -- '1 == 1'
++ let -- -- '1 == 1'
24 matches
Mail list logo
