[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [FYI] Remove $SED from basename and dirname definitions
From: |
Scott James Remnant |
Subject: |
Re: [FYI] Remove $SED from basename and dirname definitions |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Feb 2004 07:25:58 +0000 |
On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 06:57, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Scott James Remnant wrote on Thu, Feb 12, 2004 at 08:20:38PM CET:
> >
> > + * ltmain.in, libtoolize.in, commit, config/mailnotify: Remove
> > + $SED from definitions of $dirname and $basename and prefix each
> > + use with it instead. Some shells (zsh) treat the expansion as
> > + a single command instead of a command with arguments.
> > +
>
> Just curious: should't zsh be configurable to change this behaviour?
> This does not sound sh-compatible to me. Are there any other shells
> exhibiting this behaviour?
>
The trouble is defining sh compatible... I have a dim recall that ksh
behaves like this too, it's well within the permissible behaviour for a
shell anyway.
> > +basename="s,^.*/,,g"
*snip*
> > # The name of this program:
> > -progname=`echo "$progpath" | $basename`
> > +progname=`echo "$progpath" | $SED $basename`
>
> With above change, IMVHO you need "$basename" here, else pathname
> expansion will apply. Same with other occurrences of dirname and
> basename.
>
It'd only work if you had a filename of ",,g" in a directory beginning
"s,^.", but yeah, for safety we should quote those... FYI on its way.
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part