On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 14:26 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Josh, > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 05:42:58 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 08:45 +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > Hi John, Josh, > > > > > > I confirm that mail.test is the only test in the test suite failing > > > because of the bash 3.1 quoting bug. However, beware that there is no > > > guarantee that the test suite covers all the code paths, so it doesn't > > > necessarily mean that mail is the only quilt command affected. > > > Additionally, the construct causing problems might be reused later. For > > > this reason I am reluctant to remove the test for the bash bug from the > > > configure script. The fix to bash is really simple (one line), so let's > > > have people fix their bash. > > > > Just to clarify, I wasn't asking upstream quilt to change. I agree bash > > needs to be fixed and that it's a much cleaner solution. > > > > I'm just looking for a workaround I can carry in the FC-5 quilt package > > until bash is fixed. That's all. > > Ah, OK. This is reasonable then :) > > > > > If there is only the one problem in mail, the mail.in syntax could be > > > > revised to avoid this bug. > > > > > > There are several occurences in the mail command. If there was a simple > > > alternative, I guess Andreas would have been using it. > > > > I'll have to take a look at this more closely. Thanks again. > > One quick fix would be: rm quilt/mail.in. After all this is a > non-fundamental piece of quilt for many use cases.
FYI, I worked with the Fedora developers and a fixed bash package has been released. Thanks to all that offered suggestions while we waited for an update to bash. josh _______________________________________________ Quilt-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/quilt-dev
