On Thu, 04/10 14:09, Jeff Cody wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 08:48:10AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > > On 04/10/2014 08:43 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > > > On 04/10/2014 06:53 AM, Jeff Cody wrote: > > > > > >>>> +++ b/tests/qemu-iotests/common.rc > > >>>> @@ -178,10 +178,10 @@ _rm_test_img() > > >>>> local img=$1 > > >>> > > >>> Since we are quoting $img, should we quote $1 as well? > > >>> > > > > > > > > http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=351 > > > > > > But even with the notion of an assignment-context argument added to a > > > future version of POSIX, the reality is that given the present standard, > > > it's safer to either use "" to ensure no word splitting: > > > > Well, if you were trying to be portable to multiple shells, then it > > would matter. But as this script is explicitly being run under > > /bin/bash, and as bash already has support for declaration utilities > > where local is one such utility, your script as written is safe without > > "" in the arguments to local. So I'm fine whether you choose to change > > it in a respin or to leave it as written in this version.
Thanks for the thorough explanation, Eric! > > Hi Eric, > > Thanks - I consulted specifically with just the bash documentation, so > you are right, this script (and likely most of qemu-iotests) is > bash-only. > > That particular line is context as well, and not an actual change - so > while it may be a good idea to quote it to make the scripts closer to > posix-only, my guess is there are quite a few similar lines throughout > all the qemu-iotests scripts. > > Given that, if we address that it would probably make sense to do that > in a bash->posix conversion series for all the scripts (likely a low > priority, however). > OK :) Thanks, Fam
