1 |
On Saturday 21 February 2009 19:54:51 Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 19:44 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
> > On Saturday 21 February 2009 19:38:33 Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 19:29 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
5 |
> > > > On Saturday 21 February 2009 19:00:19 Mart Raudsepp wrote: |
6 |
> > > > > On Sat, 2009-02-21 at 18:55 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
7 |
> > > > > > On Saturday 21 February 2009 18:38:55 Ryan Hill wrote: |
8 |
> > > > > > > On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 18:27:10 -0500 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
9 |
> > > > > > > > looks like bash-4.0 has broken semicolon escaping in |
10 |
> > > > > > > > subshells. this comes up when using find's -exec like we do |
11 |
> > > > > > > > in a few places in eclasses: ls=$(find "$1" -name '*.po' |
12 |
> > > > > > > > -exec basename {} .po \;); shift you can work around the |
13 |
> > > > > > > > issue in a couple of ways: - quote the semicolon: |
14 |
> > > > > > > > .... ';') |
15 |
> > > > > > > > - use backticks |
16 |
> > > > > > > > `find .... \;` |
17 |
> > > > > > > > |
18 |
> > > > > > > > i'll tweak the eclasses to use quoting for now |
19 |
> > > > > > > |
20 |
> > > > > > > is this a bug or broken on purpose? |
21 |
> > > > > > |
22 |
> > > > > > i say it's a bug, but i'm not the bash maintainer |
23 |
> > > > > > |
24 |
> > > > > > i imagine it's fall out from attempts to fix support for case |
25 |
> > > > > > statements in subshells |
26 |
> > > > > |
27 |
> > > > > Then the bug should be fixed, instead of changing usage to |
28 |
> > > > > something apparently less common, as the conversion could miss |
29 |
> > > > > some. And more importantly users still want to use \; for find |
30 |
> > > > > -exec ending on their command line and their very own scripts. |
31 |
> > > > > And who knows how many shell scripts shipped by packages use the |
32 |
> > > > > escaping method. |
33 |
> > > > |
34 |
> > > > i think you missed the entire point of this thread: there's a bug in |
35 |
> > > > bash-4.0 that code is likely to hit. |
36 |
> > > |
37 |
> > > I think you missed the entire point of my reply. |
38 |
> > > That bug should be fixed, not workarounds applied all over the tree, as |
39 |
> > > users still want to be able to escape semi-colons. |
40 |
> > |
41 |
> > no one suggested doing any of this crap you're talking about. if you |
42 |
> > want to get all retarded, dont install the masked ebuild. i gave a heads |
43 |
> > up to people who might want to experiment so they wouldnt have to figure |
44 |
> > out weird errors. in the mean time, i tweaked a few common files so |
45 |
> > people wouldnt hit errors and could investigate even further. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> Perhaps you should actually state those intentions at the start instead |
48 |
> of starting to rant out on people replying. |
49 |
> Sounds good now that we actually know what the plan is. |
50 |
|
51 |
i guess i used too many code words like "bash-4.0 is broken" and "workaround". |
52 |
i'll address this in the future by just mailing base-system@g.o as they |
53 |
should be familiar with these insider terms. |
54 |
-mike |