Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: #! incompatible -- binfmt_script.c broken? | From | Andreas Schwab <> | Date | Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:50:18 +0100 |
| |
Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> writes:
|> On Wed, 04 Dec 2002, Chris Adams wrote: |> |> > Try the following under your shell. On Solaris and Tru64 sh and ksh, it |> > is handled with no error. Under bash (on Linux, Solaris, and Tru64), it |> > returns an error: |> > |> > $ set "-- xyzzy" |> > $ echo $? |> > |> > According to SUSv3, bash is not compliant, because for set, under the |> > section "CONSEQUENCES OF ERRORS" is listed "None." and the "EXIT STATUS" |> > is "Zero." |> |> > Fix the shell(s). |> |> That's correct. But how do you derive that the sh command line must |> behave the same? The sh command is not the sh special built-in. |> |> However, it would be reasonable if a /bin/sh set $1 to be "-- xyzzy" if |> a file "foo" with |> |> #! /bin/sh -- xyzzy |> |> was executed (as path = [/bin/sh] argv = [./foo] [-- xyzzy]); |> and although I didn't check, I wonder how shells without the "--" long |> options parse that line.
POSIX is quite clear about that: only "--" as a single argument is defined, other uses are undefined.
Andreas.
-- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |