X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: Herb Maeder In-reply-to: Christopher Faylor 's message of Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:10:02 EST. Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: OpenSSH-5.1p1-6 (-7) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 07:12:15 -0800 Message-ID: <8968.1226157135@maeder.org> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 07 Nov 2008 17:10:02 EST, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 01:37:44PM -0800, Herb Maeder wrote: > >On 07 Nov 2008 12:00:56 +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > >> This is a bugfix release which fixes a bug in the ssh-host-config script > >> which stumbles over user names with a substring of "ssh" in them and > >> thinks that ssh processes are still running. > > > >Is the intent now to catch only processes named 'sshd'? If so, the > >current "grep -q 'sshd*$'" may still be a little too loose. For example, > >it could match stuff like "/home/user/flosshdd". Ok, maybe not likely, > >but still it would cause the script to end in an error. > > > >Assuming we can depend on "ps -ef" always printing full path names without > >any arguments, then "grep -q '/sshd$'" might do the trick. Is there any > >reason to catch multiple trailing d's? > > It's possible that Corinna was looking for zero or more d's. > > So, something like grep -qP '/sshd?' would accommodate that. Yes, that makes sense. Zero or one was probably the intent. Thanks for pointing it out. Though the trailing $ probably still makes sense to restrict it to matching only ssh or sshd processes. grep -qP '/sshd?$' Herb. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/