Configuration Information [Automatically generated, do not change]:
Machine: x86_64
OS: netbsd
Compiler: gcc
Compilation CFLAGS: -O2 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -I/usr/include
-Wno-parentheses -Wno-format-security
uname output: NetBSD cq60-615dx.blilly.net 9.0 NetBSD 9.0 (GENERIC)
#0: Fri Feb 14 00:06:28 U
Date:Sat, 29 Aug 2020 10:22:39 -0400
From:Bruce Lilly
Message-ID:
|Bash parameter expansion (remove largest trailing match, remove
| largest leading match, pattern replacement) does not work
This is no more a bug in bash than it is for your similar rep
Robert,
Did you look at the relevant bash manual pages linked in the bug report?
>
>
Date:Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:33:37 -0400
From:Bruce Lilly
Message-ID:
| Did you look at the relevant bash manual pages linked in the bug report?
Enough to know that [\057] doesn't mean what you seem to believe it should.
kre
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 13:48 Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:33:37 -0400
> From:Bruce Lilly
> Message-ID: n...@mail.gmail.com>
>
> | Did you look at the relevant bash manual pages linked in the bug
> report?
>
> Enough to know that [\057] doesn't mean
Date:Sat, 29 Aug 2020 13:51:39 -0400
From:Bruce Lilly
Message-ID:
| Evidently not enough to see the specifications for pattern matching...
But I did, and I still fail to see anywhere where anything even
suggests that [\057] means anything other than either (whic
2020-08-29 23:47 Bruce Lilly :
> Description:
> Bash parameter expansion (remove largest trailing match,
> remove largest leading match, pattern replacement) does not work
In short, (1) ``octal escape \057'' doesn't have special meaning in
Bash glob patterns. `[\057]' means just one of a
Please don't assume that something output by printf (without quoting) for
clarity is representative of actual expansion by the shell when properly
quoted.
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 14:52 Koichi Murase wrote:
> 2020-08-29 23:47 Bruce Lilly :
> > Description:
> > Bash parameter expansion (remo
Thanks for the pointer to "shopt"; I'll check when I get a chance.
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 14:52 Koichi Murase wrote:
> 2020-08-29 23:47 Bruce Lilly :
> > Description:
> > Bash parameter expansion (remove largest trailing match,
> > remove largest leading match, pattern replacement) does n
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 9:56 PM Bruce Lilly wrote:
> Please don't assume that something output by printf (without quoting) for
> clarity is representative of actual expansion by the shell when properly
> quoted.
>
If you don't want people to assume (and you shouldn't, if you want them to
help yo
Unfortunately, because bash is GPL, I can't post the copyrighted script
which is covered by a non-GPL license.
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 15:22 Ilkka Virta wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 9:56 PM Bruce Lilly wrote:
>
>> Please don't assume that something output by printf (without quoting) for
>> cl
2020年8月30日(日) 3:55 Bruce Lilly :
> Please don't assume that something output by printf (without
> quoting) for clarity is representative of actual expansion by the
> shell when properly quoted.
Please don't assume that I have assumed something strange. To begin
with, you didn't provide the script
On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 15:25:44 -0400, Bruce Lilly
wrote:
> Unfortunately, because bash is GPL, I can't post the copyrighted script
> which is covered by a non-GPL license.
That's ridiculous. You don't have to post the whole script (neither should
you), just a simple code snippet that shows the iss
2020-08-30 4:25 Bruce Lilly :
> Unfortunately, because bash is GPL, I can't post the copyrighted
> script which is covered by a non-GPL license.
Don't worry. In this case, the GPL doesn't apply. Please read the
following Q&A.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
Even
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 15:40 Koichi Murase wrote:
> Don't worry. In this case, the GPL doesn't apply. Please read the
> following Q&A.
>
> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
>
> Even if your original `shellbug' is licensed under something other,
> and it prohibits to
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 15:27 Koichi Murase wrote:
> I assumed that you have written like
>
> separator2='\057'
> pattern1="${number1}(${separator1})"
>
> because otherwise, it doesn't work with ksh93 either.
>
You are correct.
To explain it in more detail, first, these parameter expansions w
2020-08-30 4:54 Bruce Lilly :
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020, 15:40 Koichi Murase wrote:
>> Don't worry. In this case, the GPL doesn't apply. Please read the
>> following Q&A.
>>
>> https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#IfInterpreterIsGPL
>>
>> Even if your original `shellbug' is licensed under s
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 4:53 PM Koichi Murase wrote:
[...]
> That's an interesting discussion. I don't know how you define the
> "work", but basically GPL only affects the derivative
> programs/software but not all the "work" including the output of the
> programs or the knowledge obtained in run
On 2020-08-30 at 05:53 +0900, Koichi Murase wrote:
> > It's a bit more complicated than that; if, for example, some
> > excerpt ended up in regression tests, there would be a question
> > about whether or not there was a copyright violation. As I
> > understand the GPL (IANAL), it requires all par
2020-08-29 14:46 Binarus :
> I am wondering when debian will include bash 5.1. It looks like
> debian testing and debian unstable are on bash 5.0, so it will
> probably take several years.
Actually the problem of the function `Dummy' will not be solved even
in bash 5.1. There is another but simil
> On Aug 29, 2020, at 8:41 PM, Bruce Lilly wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 4:53 PM Koichi Murase wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I know that it is confusing to those who are familiar with modern
>> Perl-style regular expressions. But historically, POSIX regular
>> expressions do not support the backslas
On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 9:12 PM Lawrence Velázquez wrote:
> (a) $'...' is not POSIX. For instance, dash does not recognize it.
dash also doesn't have adequate pattern matching for the example
task (building a path while ensuring no empty components); it
has no way to specify one-or-more (or zero
22 matches
Mail list logo
