Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-22 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Robert Luberda dixit: >However I have never checked if it's true that POSIX doesn't specify what >happens in this case. But if it is, debconf should be fixed not to use >such constructions, I think. Right. Many people assume POSIX shells are similar to Bourne shells, but the Korn shells often di

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-22 Thread Robert Luberda
Hi, > > IIRC pdksh seemed to work in my sid box, while ksh not. However I am not now > at > that box. Trying again here in an etch box pdksh fails. I will try again in a > sid > box when possible. I may have messed up the names with all the sh changes. > There were similar bug in pdksh repo

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-17 Thread Thorsten Glaser
tags 499139 = upstream confirmed fixed-upstream patch retitle 499139 mksh closes file descriptors > 2 on exec thanks Dixi quod… >This seems to be related to #154540 – found after I got the information >that it only happens to pdksh with FSH not set. It in fact is. This is fixed upstream with cha

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-17 Thread Thorsten Glaser
tags 499139 -help +upstream +confirmed thanks This seems to be related to #154540 – found after I got the information that it only happens to pdksh with FSH not set. Would a fix for this bug be worth a freeze exception? Otherwise, I’ll just fix it upstream, and the Debian package would be updated

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-17 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Agustin Martin dixit: >/bin# ln -sf pdksh sh > >and keep the shebang lines pointing to /bin/sh the test script runs (no hang >and no error signalled, even with '-e' flag enabled in both scripts, and the >right return value shown). However, if I explicitly change the shebang lines >scripts seem to

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-16 Thread Agustin Martin
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 08:51:47PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Agustin Martin dixit: > > >I may have messed up the names with all the sh changes. > > I just changed the shebang lines instead ;) > Note /bin/ksh is a symbolic link, thus shouldn't be needed to be tested. I am re-trying with pdk

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-16 Thread Thorsten Glaser
Agustin Martin dixit: >I may have messed up the names with all the sh changes. I just changed the shebang lines instead ;) Note /bin/ksh is a symbolic link, thus shouldn't be needed to be tested. >The simple way to keep everybody joined is to abuse he BTS, reassigning bug >report to e.g. 'mksh,p

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-16 Thread Agustin Martin
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 08:06:44PM +, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > tags 499139 +help > thanks > > Hi, > > I verified #499139 with mksh, pdksh and ??? interestingly enough ??? AT&T > ksh93 > on Debian GNU/Linux testing/unstable. > > I wonder if the file descriptor magic of debconf is at fault he

Bug#499139: Possible problem with debconf and shell interaction?

2008-09-16 Thread Thorsten Glaser
tags 499139 +help thanks Hi, I verified #499139 with mksh, pdksh and – interestingly enough – AT&T ksh93 on Debian GNU/Linux testing/unstable. I wonder if the file descriptor magic of debconf is at fault here instead, as, usually, the ksh93 behaviour is “right”. As I barely know debconf at all,