On 7/23/15 6:52 PM, isabella parakiss wrote:
>
> No. Don't minimize this, it's not only about BASH_REMATCH.
OK. You did, however, spend an entire message on it.
> The fact that a certain special variable is readonly for no real reason
> doesn't change this absurd nonsense about any other glob
On 7/23/15, Chet Ramey wrote:
> This is an excellent time to point out that it's to everyone's advantage
> to be as complete as possible when describing a problem on the list,
> rather than revealing additional details one at a time.
>
> There's no way anyone would have guessed that you were encou
On 7/23/15 10:57 AM, isabella parakiss wrote:
> On 7/23/15, Greg Wooledge wrote:
>> People who use "readonly" are generally doing so in the context of a
>> "restricted shell" (yes, commence laughter) or other situation where
>> that specific variable is the key to unlocking something that the
>> a
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 04:57:42PM +0200, isabella parakiss wrote:
> The fact is, I found out this by using BASH_REMATCH, trying to use it in
> different functions without interfering with each other.
Ah! That changes things. :)
imadev:~$ [[ x =~ y ]]
imadev:~$ declare -p BASH_REMATCH
declare -a
On 7/23/15, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> People who use "readonly" are generally doing so in the context of a
> "restricted shell" (yes, commence laughter) or other situation where
> that specific variable is the key to unlocking something that the
> administrator does not want the user to unlock. The
On 7/22/15 7:12 PM, isabella parakiss wrote:
> From variables.c
>
>The test against old_var's context
> level is to disallow local copies of readonly global variables (since I
> believe that this could be a security hole).
>
> Can you please expla
2015-07-23 01:12:01 +0200, isabella parakiss:
> From variables.c
>
>The test against old_var's context
> level is to disallow local copies of readonly global variables (since I
> believe that this could be a security hole).
>
> Can you please expl
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:12:01AM +0200, isabella parakiss wrote:
> From variables.c
>
>The test against old_var's context
> level is to disallow local copies of readonly global variables (since I
> believe that this could be a security hole).
>
