Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 9/18/16 11:20 PM, Felix Janda wrote:
>
> >>> Notice that the configure script disables job-control when a run-time
> >>> test (which could easily be a built-time test) fails. So by default,
> >>> a cross-compiled bash will have this bug.
> >>
> >> Which test?
> >
> > I am r
Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 9/18/16 11:20 PM, Felix Janda wrote:
>
> >>> Notice that the configure script disables job-control when a run-time
> >>> test (which could easily be a built-time test) fails. So by default,
> >>> a cross-compiled bash will have this bug.
> >>
> >> Which test?
> >
> > I am r
On 9/18/16 11:20 PM, Felix Janda wrote:
>>> Notice that the configure script disables job-control when a run-time
>>> test (which could easily be a built-time test) fails. So by default,
>>> a cross-compiled bash will have this bug.
>>
>> Which test?
>
> I am referring to BASH_SYS_JOB_CONTROL_MIS
Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 9/17/16 1:27 PM, Felix Janda wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > below this mail you can find a minimal script misbehaving when
> > job-control is configured out (tested on linx with different archs,
> > libc's, and versions (including current git)).
>
> Yes. PIPESTATUS doesn't real
On 9/17/16 1:27 PM, Felix Janda wrote:
> Hello,
>
> below this mail you can find a minimal script misbehaving when
> job-control is configured out (tested on linx with different archs,
> libc's, and versions (including current git)).
Yes. PIPESTATUS doesn't really have any valid values when the
Hello,
below this mail you can find a minimal script misbehaving when
job-control is configured out (tested on linx with different archs,
libc's, and versions (including current git)).
Notice that the configure script disables job-control when a run-time
test (which could easily be a built-time t
