Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID: <36C938C5.D367F910@dddandr.octacon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 09:22:13 +0000
From: Don Sharp <Don DOT Sharp AT dddandr DOT octacon DOT co DOT uk>
Reply-To: dwsharp AT iee DOT org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gnu-win32 <cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
Subject: Re: sources
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 05:17:39PM +0000, Don Sharp wrote:
> >As Chris is in denial mode wrt ash I'll need to have a go at fixing the
> >missing character problem in the pattern match. (He is right in saying
> >that it isn't something that the Bourne shell can do anyway so what/who
> >decides the correct behaviour is possibly a moot point).
> 
> Denial mode?  You want ash to handle the same substitutions as bash.  It
> isn't going to happen.
> 

It was perhaps unkind to tweak Chris' tail, but I would expect that if
ash
accepts an expression for evaluation, (one which the Bourne /bin/sh
won't entertain), and the expression requests the longest possible
string up to but not including the nominated terminating character, I
don't expect to be delivered one character short. If the expression in
ash has a completely different meaning than it does in bash then Chris
is right. However he hasn't stated that the rule for interpreting the
expression is different in ash and bash.

So either the expression evaluation is incorrect or
the syntax of the expressions is identical and their semantics are
different.
Which is it?

> As to who decides the correct behavior, it's not a moot point.  It's me.
> 
> If someone can point me to some documentation that proves that ash is not
> working like a standard UNIX /bin/sh, then I'll be happy to change my mind.
> 
> cgf

Cheers

Don Sharp