Re: "openapp AppName.app" versus "openapp ./AppName.app"

[Niels Grewe]

Am 31.12.2011 20:05, schrieb Ivan Vučica:
> Hi all,
> 
> I find it rather annoying to have to type "openapp ./AppName.app". I
> propose the following patch for openapp, in interest of easier use of
> bash autocomplete.
> 
> Index: openapp.in <http://openapp.in>
> ===================================================================
> --- openapp.in <http://openapp.in>  (revision 34347)
> +++ openapp.in <http://openapp.in>  (working copy)
> @@ -246,7 +246,8 @@
>  if [ -z "$openapp_full_appname" ]; then
>    echo "Can't find the required application: $openapp_app!"
>    if [ -d "./$openapp_app" ]; then
> -    echo "There is a $openapp_app in this directory; please use
> 'openapp ./$openapp_app' if you want to open it!"
> +    echo "Using $0 \"./$openapp_app\""
> +    exec "$0" "./$openapp_app"
>    fi
>    exit 1
>  fi
> 
> It's most definitely far from perfect, considering it does not pass any
> arguments appearing after app name. However, it's good enough for most
> of the cases, especially since it throws a warning which should help the
> developer that needs that feature understand why the arguments are not
> passed on.
> 
> It is definitely more helpful than previous behavior, and I can't think
> of any downsides.

You mean apart from the apparent downside of opening a security hole
that allows somebody to plant a malicious app bundle in the cwd? By the
same rationale, you shouldn't have "." in your PATH, despite of the
minor inconvenience.

Cheers,

Niels