[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Are these bash.v.posix diffs still useful? They _seem_ dated...

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: Are these bash.v.posix diffs still useful? They _seem_ dated...
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2021 13:54:29 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1

On 1/30/21 6:50 PM, L A Walsh wrote:

Since this "https://tiswww.case.edu/php/chet/bash/POSIX"; doesn't
seem to be version specific, I'm assuming these are
in the latest bash version.
I don't understand the benefit of the differences involving
hashed-commands and recovery behavior. It seemed like these
behaviors may have served a purpose at one time, but now seem
more likely to create an unnecessary failure case.

First behavior: How is it beneficial for bash to
store a non-executable in the command-hash?

Probably not very, but it's not all that harmful. The `checkhash' option
overrides this.

What's really wasteful is to put something non-executable in the hash table
when `checkhash' is set, only to remove it the next time you try to execute
it. I changed that a few weeks back.

And second, related behavior: Not searching for an alternative
in the PATH if the old hashed value stops working.

Again, `checkhash' covers this.

``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

reply via email to

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