Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20001025194822.00b14e90@pop5.banet.net> X-Sender: usbanet DOT farley3 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:56:32 -0400 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com From: "Peter J. Farley III" Subject: Re: Bash 2.04 beta 6a Cc: Eli Zaretskii In-Reply-To: References: <4 DOT 3 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 20001024211121 DOT 00ac9ac0 AT pop5 DOT banet DOT net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk At 09:37 AM 10/25/00 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >On Tue, 24 Oct 2000, Peter J. Farley III wrote: >> I thought the "#foo" in a double-quoted string might be being >> "substituted" as a perl variable whose value was null > >Is that what really happens in the specific case where you saw the >problem? I think it's really important to know what command was >passed to the shell, exactly, to be able to debug it efficiently. I really do not know the answer to that question. I can try to find out, but I'm going to have to take some time to learn how perl does these things in the first place before I can answer intelligently. >Also, there are (at least) two more unknowns in this equation: > > - did Perl invoke Bash, COMMAND.COM, or our internal emulation of > COMMAND.COM that is part of `system'? Again, I don't know, though I may be able to find out with a couple of tests. I'll get back to you on that if I'm able to figure it out. > - do you have GNU Textutils installed where you saw this problem (if > not, you get ECHO from COMMAND.COM)? Yes, I do have GNU Textutils installed (txt20b GNU Textutils 2.0 binaries for DJGPP V2), so I *should* be getting GNU ECHO and not COMMAND.COM's version. Whether I really do or not is still subject to verification. >> >You seem to be assuming that this is a Bash problem. Why do you >> >think that? Does Bash 2.03 work with this example? >> >> As for bash 2.03, the current development versions of perl will not >> build or test at all with that version, which is why I switched to >> v2.04. > >You cannot build with Bash 2.03, but you surely could try that >specific case with it, no? Hm-m-m. Yes, I could rename the v2.04 bash binaries and install just the v2.03 versions and try it out. I'll let you know what happens when I do that. Peter --------------------------------------------------------- Peter J. Farley III (pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org OR pjfarley AT banet DOT net)