On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 5:01 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> Ahh. That wasn't clear to me. Thanks.
>
>
Ouch got caught the same way. This can be reduced to
$ clear
$ echo "\e[36;44;4m\nsome colored\ttext with\ttabs\e[m\n"
$ # Recall and run prev command
repeat the later until top lines scroll out
On Thursday, October 26, 2023, Phi Debian wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 5:01 PM Greg Wooledge wrote:
>
> >
> > Ahh. That wasn't clear to me. Thanks.
> >
> >
> Ouch got caught the same way. This can be reduced to
>
> $ clear
> $ echo "\e[36;44;4m\nsome colored\ttext with\ttabs\e[m\n"
> $ #
On 10/24/23 11:14 PM, Wenlin Kang wrote:
Hi
I want to report a bug, it rarely observes the problem while running shell
script aborting test repeatedly.
At the problem, the test shell script never returns to shell.
Thanks for the report. I think some slight code rearranging can fix this.
Che
Hi,
Attached please find bug2.bash.
Here are results
% bash --version
GNU bash, version 5.2.15(3)-release (x86_64-pc-cygwin)
% ./bug2.bash
ASCII_SET-size=95
echo1 u
echo2 u
echo3 u
echo4 97
echo5 u
echo6 85
echo7 -10
echo8 -10
See some strange results below
echo9 u
echo10 u
And the most strange
On 10/26/23 10:53 AM, Victor Pasko wrote:
See some strange results below
echo9 u
echo10 u
And the most strange result
echo11
!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~
Why do you think the results are strange? What are you expecting?
--
-- Forwarded message -
From: Dennis Williamson
Date: Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: Strange results
To: Victor Pasko
echo "echo11 ${ASCII_SET:-10:1}"echo "echo11 ${ASCII_SET:-10:1}"
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 9:54 AM Victor Pasko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> echo9 u
> echo10 u
>
-- Forwarded message -
From: Victor Pasko
Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 1:57 AM
Subject: Re: Strange results
To: Dennis Williamson
Also
echo10 ${ASCII_SET:$((-10)):1}
and
echo11 ${ASCII_SET:-10:1}
have different behaviour:(
Both of these say "output the character that's 10th
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 9:07 PM Victor Pasko wrote:
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Victor Pasko
> Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 1:57 AM
> Subject: Re: Strange results
> To: Dennis Williamson
>
>
>
> Also
>
> echo10 ${ASCII_SET:$((-10)):1}
>
> and
>
> echo11 ${ASCII_SET:-10:1}
>
> h
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: aarch64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -O2 -ftree-vectorize -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexcepti\
ons -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY\
_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 02:00:01 +0700
Victor Pasko wrote:
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Victor Pasko
> Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 1:57 AM
> Subject: Re: Strange results
> To: Dennis Williamson
>
>
>
> Also
>
> echo10 ${ASCII_SET:$((-10)):1}
This is the "Substring Expansion"
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:50:13AM -0700, Dan Bornstein wrote:
> I found a case where the regex evaluator doesn't seem to be finding the
> longest possible match for a given expression. The expression works as
> expected on an older version of Bash (3.2.57(1)-release
> (arm64-apple-darwin22)).
"Dan Bornstein" writes:
> I found a case where the regex evaluator doesn't seem to be finding
> the longest possible match for a given expression. The expression
> works as expected on an older version of Bash (3.2.57(1)-release
> (arm64-apple-darwin22)).
>
> Here's the regex: ^(\$\'([^\']|\\\')*\
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, at 7:01 PM, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:50:13AM -0700, Dan Bornstein wrote:
>> I found a case where the regex evaluator doesn't seem to be finding the
>> longest possible match for a given expression. The expression works as
>> expected on an older vers
Thanks to the folks who replied.
Indeed, I misunderstood the "longest match" rule to apply to captures and not
just the whole string. (That is, I thought an earlier capture would get "first
dibs" on any matching text.) And, as was pointed out by Greg W, the exact
behavior depends more on the re
On 10/26/2023 22:08, Chet Ramey wrote:
CAUTION: This email comes from a non Wind River email account!
Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
and know the content is safe.
On 10/24/23 11:14 PM, Wenlin Kang wrote:
Hi
I want to report a bug, it rarely observes
Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: linux-gnu
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -g -O2
uname output: Linux treehug.home.kurahaupo.gen.nz 5.15.0-73-generic #80-Ubuntu
SMP Mon May 15 15:18:26 UTC 2023 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Machine Type: x8
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 20:30 Dale R. Worley wrote:
> I suspect the difference between the versions is how the regexp is
> unquoted while it is being read, with version 3 interpreting [^\'] as
> "character class excluding newline, backslash, and quote" and version 5
> interpreting it as "character
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023, at 12:25 AM, Grisha Levit wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023, 20:30 Dale R. Worley wrote:
>
>> I suspect the difference between the versions is how the regexp is
>> unquoted while it is being read, with version 3 interpreting [^\'] as
>> "character class excluding newline, backsla
18 matches
Mail list logo
