> On Jan 26, 2021, at 12:51 AM, "" <k...@plushkava.net> <k...@plushkava.net> > wrote: > >> On 25/01/2021 21:36, gregrwm wrote: >> >> is this change in functionality a regression, a "fix", or a new >> feature? >> is there any option to exclude them? >> in all 3, .. is included in .? > > This seems to be as expected. The pattern must begin with a literal dot in > order to match either of the pathnames '.' and '..'. This holds true, > irrespective of whether or not dotglob is enabled. > > Ergo, a pattern of ? should not match the pathname '.', whereas a pattern of > .? can - and will - match the pathname '..'. Similarly, a pattern of .* would > match both '.' and '..'.
According to the manual, "[t]he filenames ‘.’ and ‘..’ must always be matched explicitly even if dotglob is set." I don't see any subsequent text that overrules this for extended globs. https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Filename-Expansion.html vq
