Old idea for vi-yank-pop

be a good feature to give vi-mode access to the the stack of yanks from the default emacs mode. I figured it could be called vi_yank_pop. This is a patch I wrote a long time ago. I don't know if it works, and it probably mostly copies the emacs code. Cheers, Ian Kelling --- ../bash-4.0/lib/

process substitution and trailing file descriptors

ay, certainly not a digit. Basically, by mixing IO redirection and process substitution I'm left with a trailing file descriptor which can cause scripts to hang around despite any subsequent redirection of stdout/stderr best practices. There's no mechanism to discover these new file descriptors and they are not closed on exec. Is there any hope for me? Cheers, Ian

Re: process substitution and trailing file descriptors

efore the high numbered file descriptor created temporarily for the fifo could be closed. There's probably a perfectly reasonable case where the process substitution fifo on the RHS of an IO redirection operator should not be closed. Cheers, Ian

aliases sometimes not expanded even with expand_aliases set

Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: x86_64 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_A

dotgob+extglob bug

Running this script with your own bash path demonstrates the bug. #!/home/ian/opt/bash/bash --norc shopt -s extglob shopt -s dotglob cd $(mktemp -d) mkdir a touch a/.b touch a/c echo a/!(.b) output: a/. a/.. a/c this happens with all bash versions 4.3+ (latest is patch 18). before that, the

Re: dot gob+extglob bug

Chet Ramey writes: > On 6/9/14, 3:42 PM, Ian Kelling wrote: > Yes, it's an interesting question: what exactly does pattern negation > include? You can match all filenames beginning with a `.' by using `.' > as the first character of the pattern, so should a negated

Re: dot gob+extglob bug

The pathexp-globignore-delim.patch seems to work as advertised. > If *a matches scratch/a, for > example, that's a bug in the matching code I will have to identify and fix. Yes, this is the case. Based on your reply, the examples I showed are definitely a bug. Thank you so much.

Bug in getcwd implementation in lib/sh/getcwd.c

Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: x86_64 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: /bind/obj/repos/dist-buildroot.hg/build_x86_64/staging_dir/usr/bin/x86_64-linux-uclibc-gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MA

Invalid array subscript (single backslash) causes assertion failure

Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: i486 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='i486' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='i486-pc-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='pc' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -DPACKAGE='b

Re: Creating directories with sticky bit set

-m does not apply to parent directories created with -p If you wanted to deal with the -p, I would remove it and not pass it to mkdir, but create them yourself in the function. I'd use parameter expansion to deal with parts of the path 1 by 1. - Ian Kelling

Re: Bash 4 cursor in my prompt

;ve got to track down everything in your invocation files that affects your prompt and narrow it down to something we can test ourselves. - Ian Kelling

Re: Bash 4 cursor in my prompt

something else going on in your invocation files. Try making that the only line in your .bashrc and starting a non-login shell so thats the only file read. - Ian Kelling

Re: possible bash 4.0.10 bug: command substitution in PROMPT_COMMAND

Jared Yanovich wrote: Hi, I upgraded to bash 4.0.10 and my PS1 prompt is no longer displaying anything at all. I think this was addressed in a recent patch. Try upgrading to the most recent version. - Ian Kelling

Re: possible bash 4.0.10 bug: command substitution in PROMPT_COMMAND

Chet Ramey wrote: I cannot reproduce this using bash-4.0.10 or bash-4.0.17 on Mac OS X, Ubuntu, RHEL 4, or FreeBSD. Chet I can't reproduce it either. - Ian Kelling

Re: Bash 4 cursor in my prompt

Special Sauce wrote: From: anton To: bug-bash@gnu.org Subject: Cursor starts inside prompt I just noticed this issue too. It seems it was fine under gnu screen, but not with plain xterm or gnome-terminal. Upgrading to the latest patch version 4.0.17 fixed it. - Ian Kelling

Re: Bash 4 cursor in my prompt

Chet Ramey wrote: > Ian Kelling wrote: >> Special Sauce wrote: >>> From: anton >>> To: bug-bash@gnu.org >>> Subject: Cursor starts inside prompt >> I just noticed this issue too. It seems it was fine under gnu screen, >> but not with plain xterm or

Re: Bash 4 cursor in my prompt

Chet Ramey wrote: Ian Kelling wrote: Special Sauce wrote: From: anton To: bug-bash@gnu.org Subject: Cursor starts inside prompt I just noticed this issue too. It seems it was fine under gnu screen, but not with plain xterm or gnome-terminal. Upgrading to the latest patch version 4.0.17 fixed

Re: declare a=( {1..10} )

consistent. - Ian Kelling

unable to redirect readonly variable error

oo=bar 2>/dev/null bash: foo: readonly variable [EMAIL PROTECTED] bash_completion]$ foo=bar &>/dev/null bash: foo: readonly variable [EMAIL PROTECTED] bash_completion]$ bash --version GNU bash, version 3.00.16(1)-release (i686-redhat-linux-gnu) Copyright (C) 2004 Free Software Foundation,

Re: unable to redirect readonly variable error

On Thu 07 Jul 2005 at 20:07:33 -0400, you wrote: > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Ian Macdonald wrote: > > >Hello, > >This doesn't seem right: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] bash_completion]$ foo=x > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] bash_completion]$ foo=bar > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] bash_comp

difference between complete -o default and -o bashdefault

Hello, I can't quite work out what the difference is between -o default and -o bashdefault. One is readline-oriented and the other is not, but the effect appears to be the same for the cases that I have run through. Anyone? Ian -- Ian Macdonald | The one good thing

set +o noglob within completion function disables alias expansion

s second invocation, the alias was not used as it should have been. Ian -- Ian Macdonald | I sometimes think that God, in creating [EMAIL PROTECTED] | man, somewhat overestimated his ability. http://www.cal

Re: set +o noglob within completion function disables alias expansion

releasing 3.1? Cheers, Ian -- Ian Macdonald | Once harm has been done, even a fool [EMAIL PROTECTED] | understands it. -- Homer http://www.caliban.org/ | | | __

Arithmetic expansion with increments and output redirection

Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]: Machine: x86_64 OS: linux-gnu Compiler: gcc Compilation CFLAGS: -DPROGRAM='bash' -DCONF_HOSTTYPE='x86_64' -DCONF_OSTYPE='linux-gnu' -DCONF_MACHTYPE='x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu' -DCONF_VENDOR='redhat' -DLOCALEDIR='/usr/share/locale' -

Re: Arithmetic expansion with increments and output redirection

> Date:Tue, 23 Apr 2019 15:49:18 -0600 > From: Ian Neal > Message-ID: 1_z7uy+7rv...@mail.gmail.com> > > | When using arithmetic expansion with variable pre- and > | post-increments/decrements in the output redirection file path, > |

Re: Arithmetic expansion with increments and output redirection

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 07:12 Chet Ramey wrote: > On 4/24/19 8:47 AM, Ian Neal wrote: > > > At what point is a subshell being invoked? There's no pipeline, command > > substitution, coprocess, background process, or explicit () subshell > here, > > which are the

Re: Arithmetic expansion with increments and output redirection

> > "Utilities other than the special built-ins (see Special Built-In > Utilities) shall be invoked in a separate environment that consists of the > following...[includes redirections specified to the utility]...The > environment of the shell process shall not be changed by the utility" > > > http:

Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on ftp.gnu.org

-patches/ This is not mentioned on the main bash webpage here: http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/ Could there please be a new full tarball release of the patched version ? Thanks, Ian.

Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on ftp.gnu.org

s looking rather quaint. We could probably provide a full tarball for each patch release. Ian.

Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on ftp.gnu.org

Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Shellshock-vulnerable version still most obvious on ftp.gnu.org"): > On 11/6/14, 7:47 AM, Ian Jackson wrote: > > But in the current environment it's looking rather quaint. We could > > probably provide a full tarball for each patch release. &

Want way to run background processes with SIGINT unignored

QUIT. This whole discussion, and these proposed options, are relevant only when job control is not in effect. Thanks, Ian. [1] http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-10/msg01208.html http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2015-10/msg01211.html

Re: Want way to run background processes with SIGINT unignored

Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Want way to run background processes with SIGINT unignored"): > On 10/9/15 2:42 PM, Ian Jackson wrote: > > However, it would be very easy for bash to provide an option (via `set > > -o' perhaps) to disable this behaviour. That is, to al

Re: Want way to run background processes with SIGINT unignored

Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Want way to run background processes with SIGINT unignored"): > Chet Ramey writes ("Re: Want way to run background processes with SIGINT > unignored"): > > This is the behavior that any new option would toggle. Some name like > > `a

[PATCH] Provide shopt -s no_async_sig_ignore

So it is too late to change the default.) Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson CC: Ian Campbell --- MANIFEST| 3 +++ builtins/shopt.def | 2 ++ doc/bash.1 | 10 ++ doc/bashref.texi| 13 - execute_cmd.c

doc improvement for dotglob

shell option 'dotglob' is set and the file is not named '.' or '..'. And dotglob's dedicated section has similar wording to change. I looked at making a patch, but it seems the docs are repeated in many formats, so I figured I'd just post this first. -- Ian Kelling https://iankelling.org

Re: doc improvement for dotglob

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 09:41 AM, L. A. Walsh wrote: > > > Ian Kelling wrote: > > The docs currently say: > > > > "When a pattern is used for filename expansion, the character '.' at > > the start of a filename or immediately following a slash

Re: doc improvement for dotglob

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Chet Ramey wrote: > > Thanks for the report. There should be something in there about `.' > and `..' always having to be matched explicitly. Yw. I noticed another improvement that could be made to the docs. How do you prefer patches? And, I assume you manually

Re: aliases sometimes not expanded even with expand_aliases set

Thanks for that. It is certainly confusing that you can do "alias -p" inside the compound statement and have it print out the alias you think you have defined, but not have it work. But given that bit of the manual, I can see why that would be. On Sat, 2024-10-12 at 15:18 -0400, Chet Ramey wro

bash completion mangles file names with newlines

two completions are garbage. # The file name is being split on newlines. -- | Ian! D. Allen, BA-Psych, MMath-CompSci idal...@idallen.ca Ottawa CANADA | Home: www.idallen.com Contact Improvisation Dance: www.contactimprov.ca | Former college professor of Free/Libre GNU+Linux @ teaching.i

Re: bash completion mangles file names with newlines

that would give you a backtrace to send with your bug report. Aye, I put the same bug report into the bash-completion GitHub and the backtrace is there: https://github.com/scop/bash-completion/issues/704 -- | Ian! D. Allen, BA-Psych, MMath-CompSci idal...@idallen.ca Ottawa CANADA | Home: ww

Re: set -o notify spurious CR when jobs redirected to file

y code, but that would be a shortcoming in the recognition of the circumstances, not a lack of clarity in what the circumstances are. In short, it's still a bug. One might mitigate the bug by refusing to add the CR if output is not a TTY. That would refrain from creating what look like DOS-f