i see only two solutions as an option one option does expand aliases inside safe out of the tree the other more eval ing
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 02:27 L A Walsh <b...@tlinx.org> wrote: > > > On 2022/02/02 08:50, Chet Ramey wrote: > > On 2/2/22 8:25 AM, L A Walsh wrote: > > > > > >> I.e. My bash is posix compliant by default w/r/t aliases: > >> > > > > It's not, and that's how this whole issue got started. You're running > > bash-4.4. POSIX requires the following to work: > > > > alias switch=case > > echo $(switch foo in foo) echo ok 2;; esac ) > > > > and it simply doesn't, whether you run in posix mode or not. > > > ----- > You are right in that I was entirely in left field. However w/r/t starting > with aliases being enabled by default when bash starts (interactive or > not), > I would prefer bash follow posix rules. > i prefer always bash extras over outdated incomplete stuff specs > While I compile my bash to follow posix rules, I can't quite write my > general scripts to expect that as bash at the trunc level > > I missed the original problem being talked about here. > > My posix non-conformance issue has to do with bash not starting with > aliases enabled by default in all default invocations. > > While BASH_ALIASES is inherited I can't specify a set of aliases that I can > expect to just 'work' when bash starts. > namespaces would do > > For that matter I can't expect my own maps (arrays with non-integer or > integer > to work in child processes. > i suggest an array exporting too, maybe with memory compression prolly not e > > I've tried to suggest various improvements over the years, and don't > understand the resistance of all the suggestion. > :/ > > I will admit that my focus is utility and usability rather than > security, ever since > the attack on bash function injections, but would have suggested using a > shared memory file owned by root to hold a key (checksum key) of > functions and secured variables. Perhaps not ideal, but, I believe > workable. > > Unfortunately, all of my ideas/works after last Thanksgiving have > suffered from a > decrease in mental function due to a nasty stroke that affected my visual > cortext -- affecting both eyes and image processing. Since I have been > highly > visually oriented, many of my memories, and ability to visualize my code > and even > see or read a line at a time are impaired, requiring me to read > word-by-word which > horribly slows down reading and virtually eliminates ability to skim > text -- the result being I often miss entire phrases, even sections. > Apparently from cat scan and MRI's that stroke as only one of the worse > was only 1 of several picked up > by the dianostics. > > > > So if it looks like I missed something -- I probably did. I also > sometimes have gaps > in a logical chain of though, because I thought it, but missed putting > it into words. > > So most sorry for missing key key points in arguments, as well as > missing under- standing, what to you are obvious points of joining logic. > > I will try to continue my to increase due-diligence, but will most > assuredly fail. > > My apologies. > Ms. Linda Walsh > (aka Astara) > (at) tlinx.org > > > > > Sadly this gives some rampant examples to point out my logical flaws and > my missing basic. points in a discussion. > > I apoligize in advance for my many > >
