On 1/14/21 5:15 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
I suspect what you're being confused by, is that the "searches for" is
typically done (in shells, I have no idea what the code inside bash is
like) by simply taking each element of PATH, appending "/command_name"
and attempting an exec. If that succeeds,
I give up trying to quote appropriate context. Here's what bash 5.0
is doing:
unicorn:~$ echo "$PATH"
/home/greg/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/local/games:/usr/games:/sbin:/usr/sbin
unicorn:~$ type moo
bash: type: moo: not found
unicorn:~$ echo "echo M" > ./bin/moo
unicorn:~$ moo
bash
Date:Wed, 13 Jan 2021 21:45:08 -0500
From:wor...@alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley)
Message-ID: <87im806xu3@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
| Of course, as described in the manual page, Bash first searches for an
| executable with the right name in the PATH, and then if that
> On 2021/01/09 23:52, n952162 wrote:
>> I consider it a bug that bash (and its hash functionality) includes
>> non-executable files in its execution look-up
Of course, as described in the manual page, Bash first searches for an
executable with the right name in the PATH, and then if that fails, i
On 2021/01/09 23:52, n952162 wrote:
Hello,
I consider it a bug that bash (and its hash functionality) includes
non-executable files in its execution look-up
But bash doesn't have an execution lookup.
It has a PATH lookup, and a completion lookup (for executables
when appropriate), but the close
On 1/10/21 10:49 AM, Ángel wrote:
On 2021-01-10 at 08:52 +0100, n952162 wrote:
Hello,
I consider it a bug that bash (and its hash functionality) includes
non-executable files in its execution look-up and then (inevitably)
simply reports an error, because its such files aren't executable.
Perh
On 2021-01-10 at 08:52 +0100, n952162 wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I consider it a bug that bash (and its hash functionality) includes
> non-executable files in its execution look-up and then (inevitably)
> simply reports an error, because its such files aren't executable.
>
> Perhaps it's there to suppo
