On 4/14/20 10:05 AM, casper....@oracle.com wrote:
>
>> On 4/14/20 9:44 AM, casper....@oracle.com wrote:
>>> pwd has the -L option:
>>>
>>> The following options shall be supported by the implementation:
>>>
>>> -L
>>> If the PWD environment variable contains an absolute pathname
>>> of the current directory and the pathname does not contain any
>>> components that are dot or dot-dot, pwd shall write this
>>> pathname to standard output, except that if the PWD environment
>>> variable is longer than {PATH_MAX} bytes including the
>>> terminating null, it is unspecified whether pwd writes this
>>> pathname to standard output or behaves as if the -P option had
>>> been specified. Otherwise, the -L option shall behave as the -P
>>> option.
>>>
>>>
>>> It mentions "dot-dot" and "dot".
>>>
>>> It does seems to allow:
>>>
>>> (cd /; PWD=////////// pwd -L)
>>> //////////
>>> and
>>> (cd /home/casper; PWD=/home///////casper pwd -L)
>>> /home///////casper
>>>
>>>
>>> Is this a correct implmentation?
>>
>> Does the standard cover this at all? It only mentions PWD being set by `cd'
>> and initialized by `sh'. If you assign it directly, at least `cd' is
>> explicitly unspecified, and since `pwd' is only required to "remove
>> unnecessary slash characters" if -P is supplied, I'd say you've left the
>> realm of the standard and the implementation can do what it likes.
>
>
> So you are saying that it would be fine to squish out the additional
> slashed in the output? (Not doing anything would be fine, too)
Yes. It's unspecified.
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU c...@case.edu http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/
