X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=a9zcPeIDVcLN7PQE
	PHN++1GUEJhckxDENEb1pMO+B8jnDYW6c6Cxa4T+nkZDSs4LHbbZSiX1X0K3dWQf
	iBgcZGfgLiMzbxuJNswprIa5WBMOjRGEH0ptMT3QgOYEgGiXd2vQWMQCgzizQuRc
	6k+8sEbQRmXL5p6j2OVIChe+lE8=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=V2/QT0RO2CJKuQN89rCYjo
	Uhelg=; b=b9dZGM9JuB2nJCwW0iqI6tVI74pQhMNRC4FTEM2H2OhcLXIbIzxecx
	zIiWqvdQYfO7V0R5o98pkscfdHZtOHcrplItiTmo6KjaRD8/3uuVNkpjGIFu4zjs
	cPKuXQbXRWrDdEQmTAvJmR3gUKOFq/x+JfQpAeklKv8i1Gf6oRjxM=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,HTML_MESSAGE,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=Shell, H*u:5.1, H*UA:en-US, H*u:en-US
X-HELO:	sonic302-4.consmr.mail.bf2.yahoo.com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1532216201; bh=r5HYNPZ4WFGzqDLxfATDrH5+pbHXh5ntm/mhkycukuY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=V7Tle2fXrxpDjr4mufef5ZTgn+Wj9ydRW7ek3XOS79scO5ZJuwPE5CBOm9lu0sHn730rpgJg0zj+dCK4LfktdBY9dsRxVGy8E80SMxInksB+YTKEPjNiYEu1C8dOxVb3Ai2GjaDj2RlrEgHj0BfR0X/+zXiY/c/sr8MJuHuHukj/dZqpvg8bplP9UHdwC6iUDX4/kvpyCNSNoayFxP8wlMgYm7xHWy79ePlzySYgFCO+s+kBh67ctTyHPZUzZoSZDdykffOtamut3J4Wz8SCKpQN8wegSDh5+yflYIxc9sjHnrJR7Rinep9UDxZv+vZCMG+C/Yl1WOVf/FgR8V0urg==
Subject:	Re: BASH 4.4 mapfile/readarray/read builtins mis-behaving with pipe [edit] documentation bug
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<69b0bc3c-7ead-920e-f04b-ec631c3453b7 AT verizon DOT net> <2beb175e-2291-6b12-6efd-c84704f6762f AT verizon DOT net> <07814e3d-d637-47c2-74fd-cb2916c29099 AT redhat DOT com>
From:	BloomingAzaleas <rdbingham AT verizon DOT net>
Message-ID:	<30b851ee-7144-345c-926d-8a08d9a6a27c@verizon.net>
Date:	Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:36:38 -0400
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20090812 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.23 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<07814e3d-d637-47c2-74fd-cb2916c29099@redhat.com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id w6LNasai019415

Reply to Eric Blake,

At this time, I do not have a Linux image available to me.   If 
you saw the same behavior on Fedora, then I suggest the behavior 
originates upstream at or close the the GNU source-code level.

Mr. Penny's response asserted the observed behavior "is intended 
behavior", in which case there should exist a GNU specification 
document describing the intended pipe STDIN re-direction 
restrictions for 'mapfile', 'read' and possibly other "builtins". 
Lacking such a reference nothing can be said about intent. 
Implementation-as-intent implies errors and conceptual and 
behavioral  inconsistencies in the implementation were intended. 
I decline to think that of the distributed BASH maintenance team. 
He provided a reference to 
http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/024, where, if you read the 
page, the behavior inconsistency I reported is shown under the 
heading of "More broken stuff:".  I take that "More broken 
stuff:" opinion to mean yet others read the same surface 
discrepancy between doc and behavior as I did.

I believe what we have at this point is:

A) GNU doc lacking nuance, attention to consistent terminology, 
and helpful rule-statement to code example/counter-example 
illustrations adjacent to rule statements.  For a doc 
counter-example, the Open Group doc at 
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html 
does make an effort to distinguish behaviors between "2.14 
Special Built-In Utilities" and "2.9.1 Simple Commands" whereas 
the GNU doc indiscriminately mixes the words "commands" (section 
3.2) and "builtin" and "command" and the phrase "builtin command" 
(section 4) as if their behaviors are identical under the section 
4 title of "Shell Builtin Commands" 
(https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Shell-Builtin-Commands.html#Shell-Builtin-Commands). 
The GNU doc for shopt lastpipeis fairly opaque unless you have 
deep knowledge and that knowledge is cued when considering the 
possible meanings of "current shell environment" for built-ins 
(same process) vs. external child-process executables.

B) However conceptually inconsistent, an obsessive BASH doc 
reader could imply the observed bash built-ins behavior by 
integrating multiple hints and rule statements scattered across 
the GNU doc and then, crucially, doubting the plain meaning of 
the unqualified doc statements of "Read lines from the standard 
input..." .

Thank you for your response.

Regards,

UN*X Since '85

On 7/20/2018 12:08 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/17/2018 08:52 PM, BloomingAzaleas wrote:
>> Reply to Steven Penny <svnpenn at gmail dot com>:
>>
>>     no mis-behaving: this is intended behavior - you yourself 
>> have given
>>     workarounds: either redirect output to a file that can be 
>> later read, or pipe to
>>     command grouping ala {} or () and read stdin from inside 
>> the subshell
>>
>
>> I suggest the following adjustment to the man pages inserting 
>> a parenthetical cue regards behavior in pipes:
>
> Is the behavior you are complaining about unique to Cygwin, or 
> can it be reproduced on a GNU/Linux box?  If the latter, then 
> an upstream bug report is better than asking for a 
> cygwin-specific patch.  [Hint - as the maintainer of the cygwin 
> bash port, I don't recall adding any cygwin-specific tweaks for 
> mapfile - and a quick test on Fedora shows the same behaviors]
>

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -