Re: degraded error message in case of hash-bang interpreter error

2024-11-03 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Mon, 4 Nov 2024 06:55:54 +0300 From:=?UTF-8?B?T8SfdXo=?= Message-ID: | On Monday, November 4, 2024, Martin D Kealey | wrote: | | > POSIX says that the execve syscall reads the name of an interpreter (and | > options) from a '#!' line, | > | | W

Re: degraded error message in case of hash-bang interpreter error

2024-11-03 Thread Oğuz
On Monday, November 4, 2024, Martin D Kealey wrote: > POSIX says that the execve syscall reads the name of an interpreter (and > options) from a '#!' line, > Where? -- Oğuz

Re: degraded error message in case of hash-bang interpreter error

2024-11-03 Thread Martin D Kealey
This is one of those cases I would file under "POSIX being annoyingly literal". POSIX says that the execve syscall reads the name of an interpreter (and options) from a '#!' line, prefaces them onto the front of argv, and then restarts itself. This is why some people argue that ENOENT is "logical"

Re: [PATCH] lib/readline/doc makefiles clean targets

2024-11-03 Thread Chet Ramey
On 11/1/24 6:20 PM, Mike Jonkmans wrote: On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 01:25:46PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote: On 10/29/24 1:04 PM, Mike Jonkmans wrote: Hi Chet et al., If I run, on devel (4917f285): - ./configure - make - make clean - git status I would expect to see nothing special. Instead: a) a who

Re: bash -xv issue with stderr

2024-11-03 Thread Chet Ramey
On 11/3/24 5:28 AM, Christoph Zimmermann wrote: Thanks for all the quick reactions on that issue (including microsuxx's suggestion which unfortunately does require a CB change). If this is intended behaviour, it should be clearly documented on the corresponding man page (which doesn't seem to

Re: bash -xv issue with stderr

2024-11-03 Thread Greg Wooledge
On Sun, Nov 03, 2024 at 11:28:24 +0100, Christoph Zimmermann wrote: > Thanks for all the quick reactions on that issue (including microsuxx's > suggestion which unfortunately does require a CB change). > > If this is intended behaviour, it should be clearly documented on the > corresponding man pa

Re: bash -xv issue with stderr

2024-11-03 Thread #!microsuxx
u can just try the BASH_XTRACEFD=3 line w/o else ... and where u need set -xv output u capture the fd 3 or u can set -xv to 2 but apps to stderr use 3 On Sun, Nov 3, 2024, 13:45 Christoph Zimmermann wrote: > Thanks for all the quick reactions on that issue (including microsuxx's > suggestion whi

Re: bash -xv issue with stderr

2024-11-03 Thread Christoph Zimmermann
Thanks for all the quick reactions on that issue (including microsuxx's suggestion which unfortunately does require a CB change). If this is intended behaviour, it should be clearly documented on the corresponding man page (which doesn't seem to be case ATM). On 02.11.24 19:57, Chet Ramey wro