Update of bug #18136 (project mc):
Status:None = Fixed
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
___
Follow-up Comment #5:
A patch has been applied
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #18136 (project mc):
Mehmet, instead of using the attached patch that breaks compatibility with
bash 3.2 you might want to use the hack/patch that I posted to the mc-devel
list in relation to this report.
That patch is almost identical to this one, but by escaping
Follow-up Comment #4, bug #18136 (project mc):
Thank you very much for your kind reply, dear Leonard!
I found the hack you have mentioned, made an appropriate patch for our Gentoo
ebuild system, run the new installation with success and no ill side-effects.
You might want to follow our
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #18136 (project mc):
Thank you very much, dear Andrey!
I have made an ebuild for Gentoo containing your patch, which solved the
reported problems. Please see here:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153925
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #18136 (project mc):
I made the patch to work with bash 3.2. Apparently bash changed to the way of
handling character codes similar to that of tsch.
I have not tested it well and not checked it with bash 3.1. Report any
problems here.
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 11:45 +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
IMO, if you intend to work on a fix you should follow the
suggestion of the bash maintainer to switch over to using
printf - not only for bash but for all cases. Of course
a fallback
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Yes, I read that comment. However I'm not prepared to start breaking the
functionality of shells that I never use.
This is a rather strange statement. As a developer you should try to
go beyond your personal
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Yes, I read that comment. However I'm not prepared to start breaking the
functionality of shells that I never use.
This is a rather strange statement. As a developer
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Yes, I read that comment. However I'm not prepared to start breaking the
functionality of shells that I never use.
This is
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Ok. Since I am not native english speaker I cannot judge whether
he is recommending it or not. In any case I can see why keeping
the old behaviour of 'echo' is important for large scripts, however
what we have in MC is nothing as big. I just feel that
Hello Pavel,
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 13:27 +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Yes, I read that comment. However I'm not prepared to start breaking the
functionality of shells that I never use.
This is a rather strange statement. As a developer you should try to
go beyond your personal preferences.
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Wed, 1 Nov 2006, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
Ok. Since I am not native english speaker I cannot judge whether
he is recommending it or not. In any case I can see why keeping
the old behaviour of 'echo' is important for large scripts, however
what we have
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 14:55 +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
I am beginning
to wonther whether do we really want to escape the characters
using echo or printf.
For embedded backslashes etc. I suppose we do.
Leonard.
--
mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
Hello Thomas,
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 07:51 -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote:
Before rushing off to change things to
accommodate bash 3.2, it's worth checking if the fix will work with other
shells.
I'm not quite sure which fix you are referring to here. The temporary
hack I send to this list
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 15:15 +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
The printf solution wouldn't be that hard to implement in fact. It
may be even simpler. I can look at it.
That would be nice. Thank you.
Leonard.
--
mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
Hello Thomas,
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 08:38 -0500, Thomas Dickey wrote:
One problem is that the user has to keep track (for the non-automatic
workarounds) of the bash version.
No. Default setting of 0 (or unset) of bash_octal_digits would fallback
to option 1, which works for bash = 2.05b (in
Hi Pavel,
On Mon, 2006-10-30 at 11:45 +0200, Pavel Tsekov wrote:
IMO, if you intend to work on a fix you should follow the
suggestion of the bash maintainer to switch over to using
printf - not only for bash but for all cases. Of course
a fallback may be required. After all according to bash
Hello,
On Sun, 29 Oct 2006, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
Hi Christian,
On Sat, 2006-10-28 at 23:48 +0200, Christian Hamar alias krix wrote:
Attached patch implements this. This is not a proposition for a final
solution, just a temporary hack for users of bash = 3.2.
Do not use with
Hi Christian,
On Sat, 2006-10-28 at 23:48 +0200, Christian Hamar alias krix wrote:
Attached patch implements this. This is not a proposition for a final
solution, just a temporary hack for users of bash = 3.2.
Do not use with versions of bash = 2.05b!
Thx for the patch. It works with
URL:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?18136
Summary: MC wont work with new bash-3.2 propeply with all
directories.
Project: GNU Midnight Commander
Submitted by: krix
Submitted on: Saturday 10/28/2006 at 12:22
Category:
Hi,
If I understand the comments in the code only bash 2.05b has a problem
with 4 number octals. Indeed a test with bash-3.0 confirms this. Since
only alphas (not numbers) are not being escaped there are no problems
with directories with names like a_0 for 2.05b bash = 3.2.
Anyway, instead of
Hi Christian,
On Sat, 2006-10-28 at 10:22 +, Christian Hamar wrote:
I just upgraded to bash-3.2 and now mc gives me error that Cannot change
directory to XY.. .
http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-bash@gnu.org/msg02150.html
Fix needs to be made to subshell_name_quote() in the (subshell_type
Hi,
On Sat, 2006-10-28 at 15:30 +0200, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
Anyway, instead of testing for bash = 3.2 inside the bash loop we can
suffice by adding a version check for bash 2.05b to the shell type
test.
A quick and dirty hack for users of bash = 3.2 would be to just get rid
of the
Attached patch implements this. This is not a proposition for a final
solution, just a temporary hack for users of bash = 3.2.
Do not use with versions of bash = 2.05b!
Thx for the patch. It works with 3.2 (tested)
If you can ride with BASH_VERSINFO then maybe this can be go to CVS.
And
24 matches
Mail list logo
