Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 12:59:58 -0400
To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Cc: chet AT nike DOT ins DOT cwru DOT edu
Subject: Re: Has CR/LF and cat problem with textutils-2.0 been solved?
Message-ID: <20000927125958.A8997@cygnus.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com, chet AT nike DOT ins DOT cwru DOT edu
References: <1000927160309 DOT AA92050 DOT SM AT nike DOT ins DOT cwru DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i
In-Reply-To: <1000927160309.AA92050.SM@nike.ins.cwru.edu>; from chet@nike.ins.cwru.edu on Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 12:03:09PM -0400

On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 12:03:09PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> >However *all* shells (and not only bash) *must* read the standard
>> >output of command expansion (backtick) in *text* mode, as it *does*
>> >expect text and is *not* willing to handle binary data there.
>> 
>> This was my point.  We fixed ash to do the right thing and I've been waiting
>> patiently for the bash maintainer to fix bash as well.
>
>How about a bug report?  Or maybe an email?  I don't read this list
>very often, so, unless I get mail about it, `waiting patiently' is
>probably not going to get the job done.

I wasn't referring to you.  We have a person who produces cygwin bash
binaries for distribution.  It's his "job" to interface with you and
make sure that patches are sent your way.  Unfortunately, he has
disappeared from view so we're stuck with the usual grousing, confusion,
endless re-explanation, that people enjoy so much rather than having
someone step forward to actually fix the problem and make a new binary
release.

I know that you could easily fix the problem but I don't expect you to
produce a new bash tar.gz file.

>Now, do you want all '\r's stripped, or \r\n translated to \n when
>reading command substitution output?

\r\n -> \n.

Or maybe we should just have backticks delete all of the files on the
machine that begin with "q" when a \r\n is detected.  People seem to
like to discuss and theorize and agonize about this and this would
certainly provide fuel for discussion.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com