X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: Rugxulo <rugxulo AT gmail DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Bash bugs (was: djgpp/libreadline bug)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:23:22 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 63
Message-ID: <f237410b-8271-4119-8608-062a3c703d81@z7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
References: <013d25d6-f34d-4686-9c68-0de775d5bf59 AT t20g2000yqe DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<7705c9031003290422w7015bbd6y5e8647aec1ba3f36 AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 
	<109418c8-c160-4b9f-8e6c-a842da1b7a98 AT k13g2000yqe DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<83oci71dhr DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <11fa369b-5fab-42ac-805f-1e7e74051411 AT l36g2000yqb DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<83fx3j1874 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <81255c92-b71b-4d8b-871c-fe057d72ddb7 AT u22g2000yqf DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<834ojz111c DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <9e95b163-ba8a-467d-870e-4f3437dd9a96 AT y17g2000yqd DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<1433b3f4-9d44-455b-9465-e873fd2cb618 AT 33g2000yqj DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<l2i7705c9031003301830hc62e763euf24398f9661b0fcc AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> 
	<f6c09a3b-9e24-457a-9c5a-d2a2c75181aa AT 30g2000yqi DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<8d449cf5-3dce-48c8-b8e7-e535b037b4a6 AT 8g2000yqz DOT googlegroups DOT com> 
	<83zl1oxzat DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <81hah9Fit3U1 AT mid DOT individual DOT net> 
	<4BB4C8EC DOT 8050909 AT iki DOT fi>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.13.115.246
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1270160602 2337 127.0.0.1 (1 Apr 2010 22:23:22 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 22:23:22 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info: z7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246; 
	posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 5.1; U; en) Presto/2.5.22 
	Version/10.51,gzip(gfe)
Bytes: 4549
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

On Apr 1, 10:25=A0am, Andris Pavenis <andris DOT pave DOT  DOT  DOT  AT iki DOT fi> wrote:
> 31.03.2010 19:11, Robert Riebisch kirjoitti:
>
> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> Do you have the latest v2.04 ports of Bash, Sed, and related
> >> utilities? =A0If not, please upgrade and try again.
>
> > Not always a good idea. Bash.exe from 'beta/v2gnu/bsh205bbr3.zip'
> > crashes silently very often for me, where Bash.exe from
> > 'current/v2gnu/bsh204br3.zip' works fine for me.

Really? Everything I've tried works fine in 2.05bbr3. If you have
specific examples of things that don't work, please tell us!

> It is not very surprising unfortunately.
>
> I also have noticed that old port of bash-2.0.4 is more stable rather
> than one of bash-2.0.5b even after all fixes done for DJGPP.

Not in my experience.

> Perhaps it was not so noticeable several years ago as configure
> and other scripts used them most likely smaller subset of bash
> features rather than now. As result more bugs of DJGPP ports are
> exposed now.

The Autoconf people explicitly target only POSIX, if at all possible.
Honestly, it's much smaller scripts since 2.64 but still way too slow
to build (e.g. ZILE, ugh, configure takes forever). Bash just happens
to be the most common shell on GNU systems. (And yes, 2.05b is old old
old by their standards.)

> For example I failed to build gcc-4.4.3 for DJGPP (libtool related
> failure when building libstdc++-v3) and also similar failure for
> binutils-2.20.

What libtool error exactly? I assume it's not the dumb "not a valid
archive" CRLF vs. LF quirk (which is fixed in r3). I know that Libtool
still really needs someone to run tests with DJGPP, though, hence it
may have bugs. It's just too unwieldy for me.  :-(

> I do not have time now to try to fix these problems in the current ports
> of bash. The same also an attempt to port newer versions of bash.

Well, we sure can't expect Chet Ramey to care about DJGPP, can
we?    :-/

> Sometimes long ago I tried to do that with bash-3.0, but never reached
> even that level of stability that we have with 2.0.5b.
>
> I'm afraid that attempts to port new versions of many GNU software
> packages for DJGPP may soon come to end unless we have better port of BAS=
H
> or some other compatible enough shell.

I still say that DASH (Debian Ash) is much easier to build, even
though it currently doesn't work. It should, in theory, be much easier
to get that working than trying to keep up with Bash (which is
humongous). DASH claims to be POSIX compliant, so it should work with
Autoconf.