public inbox for cygwin@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RE: Bash backquote bug?
       [not found] <8B8C8B6AEC2C6B4DA7862541B84050875EFC4C@MPSMSG04.us.schp.co m>
@ 2003-01-13  3:23 ` Randall R Schulz
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Randall R Schulz @ 2003-01-13  3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin

Michael,

My genius does not subsume that of the entire Cygwin community. Please keep 
all Cygwin dialogs on <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>.


At 13:53 2003-01-08, Barillier, Michael wrote:
>The lines in the example are the lines that fail in the configure script.
>I ran them directly from the command line and got the output shown.  The
>fact that you didn't get the same results is a bit, erm ... troubling. :)

"Challenging" or "intriguing" or "bothersome," perhaps. But given this 
best-of-all-possible-worlds world in which we now live, such things don't 
trouble me.


>I've attached the output of `cygcheck -s -v'.  I'd ran the Cygwin setup
>program this morning and was trying to build some Emacs Lisp files to get
>my home directory in order--everything was downloaded from
><http://archive.progeny.com/cygwin/>, IIRC, as of about 12:00EST.
>
>Oh--the shebang line in the script references /bin/sh.  It was generated
>by autoconf-2.53, if that's of any importance.  `ls' is aliased to `ls -F',
>but even when unaliased `configure' barfs.  $CYGWIN is set to `tty notitle
>glob ntsec'.

Your original post used "-L" ("-L, --dereference  list entries pointed to 
by symbolic links") not "-F" ("-F, --classify  append indicator (one of 
*/=@|) to entries").

That, of course, suggests the answer to the puzzle (and proves that it is 
not "troubling"): The "configure" file presumably has its execute bit set, 
which causes "ls -F" to flag the output with a * which in turn caused the 
"echo $*" (with the $* unquoted) command to expand what appeared at that 
point to be a glob expression.


Randall Schulz


>*Update*  So to check that I'm not imagining things, I re-ran the set of
>commands I'd put in the email, and now they're working correctly for me.
>The configure script, however, still does not.  I've attached the source
>tarball that's failing--it's my Emacs startup files, please no comments on
>the quality of my Lisp coding or overall incoherence of the files. :)  If
>you run:
>
>   $ tar xzvf bw-emacs-1.2.2.tar.gz
>   $ cd bw-emacs-1.2.2
>   $ ./configure
>
>you should (?) get an error stating that `ls -t appears to fail'.  The
>associated lines are the ones mentioned in my initial post.  I'll continue
>rooting through the script to see what may be causing it, but if you have
>any thoughts I'd appreciate hearing them.
>
>Thanks!
>
>-- mjb
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Randall R Schulz [mailto:rrschulz@cris.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, 2003 January 08 15:09
> > To: cygwin@cygwin.com
> > Subject: Re: Bash backquote bug?
> >
> >
> > Michael,
> >
> > I cannot reproduce this. When I recreate your experiment, I
> > get the results
> > I'd expect.
> >
> > Are you sure your script is using BASH? You should know that
> > /bin/sh is
> > ash, not BASH. Nonetheless, I cannot reproduce the problem
> > with ash, either.
> >
> > Out of curiosity, why are you using the "-L" option to "ls?"
> > Are symbolic
> > links involved here?
> >
> > Please send "cygcheck -s -v" output as a non-inline,
> > non-compressed text
> > attachment.
> >
> > Randall Schulz
> >
> >
> > At 12:44 2003-01-08, Barillier, Michael wrote:
> > >While running a configure script under bash-2.05b, I
> > observed a bug (?)
> > >similar to the following:
> > >
> > >   $ ls configure*
> > >   configure  configure.in
> > >   $ echo timestamp >conftest.file
> > >   $ ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file
> > >   conftest.file  ./configure
> > >   $ set X `ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file`
> > >   $ echo $*
> > >   X conftest.file ./configure ./configure.in
> > >
> > >So, it appears that `ls' produces different output when
> > evaluated at the
> > >command prompt and when run under backquote.  Any ideas?
> > >
> > >-- mjb


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Bash backquote bug?
       [not found] <8B8C8B6AEC2C6B4DA7862541B84050875EFC4B@MPSMSG04.us.schp.co m>
@ 2003-01-13  3:23 ` Randall R Schulz
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Randall R Schulz @ 2003-01-13  3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: cygwin

Michael,

I cannot reproduce this. When I recreate your experiment, I get the results 
I'd expect.

Are you sure your script is using BASH? You should know that /bin/sh is 
ash, not BASH. Nonetheless, I cannot reproduce the problem with ash, either.

Out of curiosity, why are you using the "-L" option to "ls?" Are symbolic 
links involved here?

Please send "cygcheck -s -v" output as a non-inline, non-compressed text 
attachment.

Randall Schulz


At 12:44 2003-01-08, Barillier, Michael wrote:
>While running a configure script under bash-2.05b, I observed a bug (?)
>similar to the following:
>
>   $ ls configure*
>   configure  configure.in
>   $ echo timestamp >conftest.file
>   $ ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file
>   conftest.file  ./configure
>   $ set X `ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file`
>   $ echo $*
>   X conftest.file ./configure ./configure.in
>
>So, it appears that `ls' produces different output when evaluated at the
>command prompt and when run under backquote.  Any ideas?
>
>-- mjb


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Bash backquote bug?
@ 2003-01-13  3:23 Barillier, Michael
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Barillier, Michael @ 2003-01-13  3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 'cygwin@cygwin.com'

While running a configure script under bash-2.05b, I observed a bug (?)
similar to the following:

  $ ls configure*
  configure  configure.in
  $ echo timestamp >conftest.file
  $ ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file
  conftest.file  ./configure
  $ set X `ls -Lt ./configure conftest.file`
  $ echo $*
  X conftest.file ./configure ./configure.in

So, it appears that `ls' produces different output when evaluated at the
command prompt and when run under backquote.  Any ideas?

-- mjb


*********************************************************************
This message and any attachments is solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, copying, use or distribution of the information included in this message is prohibited -- Please immediately and permanently delete.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-08 22:45 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
     [not found] <8B8C8B6AEC2C6B4DA7862541B84050875EFC4C@MPSMSG04.us.schp.co m>
2003-01-13  3:23 ` Bash backquote bug? Randall R Schulz
     [not found] <8B8C8B6AEC2C6B4DA7862541B84050875EFC4B@MPSMSG04.us.schp.co m>
2003-01-13  3:23 ` Randall R Schulz
2003-01-13  3:23 Barillier, Michael

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).