Re: Potential bash 2.05 issues with 'set'

[Akim Demaille]

 Tim == Tim Van Holder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Tim Something like this, perhaps?

For sure!

___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

Re: Potential bash 2.05 issues with 'set'

[Tim Van Holder]

  Tim == Tim Van Holder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
 Tim Something like this, perhaps?
 
 For sure!
 
OK - installed (this may be resolved in bash 2.06; if so, I'll try to
remember to amend this entry accordingly).


___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

Re: Potential bash 2.05 issues with 'set'

[Paul Eggert]

 From: Tim Van Holder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 18:44:43 +0200
 
 bash's behaviour with regards to the 'set' builtin has changed in 2.05
 This apparently lead to a broken config.cache when using bash 2.05

  ! ac_cv_path_install=${ac_cv_path_install='ginstall -c'}
  --- 115 
  ! ac_cv_path_install=${ac_cv_path_install=$'ginstall -c'}

Why is this broken?  The two lines have the same behavior with Bash 2.05.

It's true that you can't parse the latter line with other shells.
So perhaps what you're saying is that, if you use Bash 2.05 to
run 'configure', you're stuck with using Bash 2.05 to do everything
else, too?

 it is probably still worth mentioning in the autoconf manual's
 section on portable shell programming.

Yes, that makes sense.

___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

Potential bash 2.05 issues with 'set'

[Tim Van Holder]

I asked about this a whil ago, but since I didn't receive any
comments, I'm asking again.

bash's behaviour with regards to the 'set' builtin has changed
in 2.05:

 3.  New Features in Bash
 
 b.  When `set' is called without options, it prints function
 defintions in a way that allows them to be reused as input.
 This affects `declare' and `declare -p' as well.
 
 then look at the ansi-c quoting rules section.

This apparently lead to a broken config.cache when using bash 2.05
(not sure which version of autoconf):

 CONFIG.CACHE
 ==
 *** bash_204\config.cache   Sat Sep  1 17:25:12 2001
 --- bash_205\config.cache   Sat Sep  1 17:32:38 2001
 ***
 *** 115 
 ! ac_cv_path_install=${ac_cv_path_install='ginstall -c'}
 --- 115 
 ! ac_cv_path_install=${ac_cv_path_install=$'ginstall -c'}
 ***
 *** 119 
 ! ac_cv_prog_CPP=${ac_cv_prog_CPP='gcc -E'}
 --- 119 
 ! ac_cv_prog_CPP=${ac_cv_prog_CPP=$'gcc -E'}
 ***
 *** 121 
 ! ac_cv_prog_LN_S=${ac_cv_prog_LN_S='cp -p'}
 --- 121 
 ! ac_cv_prog_LN_S=${ac_cv_prog_LN_S=$'cp -p'}
 ***
 *** 123 
 ! ac_cv_prog_YACC=${ac_cv_prog_YACC='bison -y'}
 --- 123 
 ! ac_cv_prog_YACC=${ac_cv_prog_YACC=$'bison -y'}

What I wanted to know is whether or not this is likely to
affect current autotools (I don't have a version of bash 2.05
installed, so I can't check myself)?  If so, it will need to be
fixed; if not, it is probably still worth mentioning in the
autoconf manual's section on portable shell programming.


___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool