bug-bash
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bash 4.2 breaks source finding libs in lib/filename...


From: Linda Walsh
Subject: Re: bash 4.2 breaks source finding libs in lib/filename...
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 13:04:19 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100228 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.24 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666



Chet Ramey wrote:

On 2/29/12 2:42 PM, Eric Blake wrote:




In the middle of the histrionics and gibberish, we have the nugget of an
actual proposal (thanks, Eric):

------- Original Message --------
Subject: bash 4.2 breaks source finding libs in lib/filename...
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:34:21 -0800
From: Linda Walsh <address@hidden>
To: bug-bash <address@hidden>

I have several files that  ***source*** the ***lib*** files*** by expecting
the name of the lib to be checked against PATH --

How look up [lib] files
relative to PATH regardless of them having a '/' in them?
---

You are welcome!

        Not that my original email wouldn't have said I was
trying to source library files regardless of whether or not
a "/" was in them or anything...
----
        And 2nd email:


Try 'C', if you ***include*** an ***include file*** with "/", it scans for it in each ***.h root.*** (along with other langs given for examples) --

So far, no references to *executing* anything, only including things
that have "/" in them...
====

Erics first response:

Agreed - as this behavior is _mandated_ by POSIX, for both sh(1) and for
***execlp(2)**** and friends.

---
He switches to talking about 'exec' -- nothing to do with libraries, immediately
after Greg posts references to 'command execution'....

But if thanking Eric works for you, that's fine.


        [to allow `.' to look anchored relative pathnames up in $PATH]

About the best we can do is accept a patch (are you willing to write it?
if not, quit complaining) that would add a new shopt, off by default, to
allow your desired alternate behavior.

Maybe we can have a rational discussion about that.

----
        what's to discuss.  I submit a patch, and you include it.
That's what Eric has indicated for you.  You can thank him for that
as well.

        As I indicated, that functionality would be controlled by
the  posix switch -- if you don't want source/. to be able to include
hierarchal names, then you can select posix mode -- Eric said that's
what he was used to .. so again, we can thank Eric...

        Given the number of items on my plate, working in multiple languages
and hopping from proj to proj (ADHD), my terminology isn't always precise,
but I usually manage to say what I mean -- like only talking about sourcing
library files -- never mentioning exec or command execution..

        Sometimes, I can write well, but often, when things are off the
top of my head, ... they may have a blond tinge to them...  ;-/










reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]