handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
Is there a reason why bash doesn't treat == as an illegal test operator when running in POSIX mode? This is problematic because use of test == in scripts that should be POSIX isn't getting caught when I run them under bash's POSIX mode. The scripts then fail when run under dash which seems to be s

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Geir Hauge
2012/5/27 Jon Seymour : > Is there a reason why bash doesn't treat == as an illegal test > operator when running in POSIX mode? POSIX does not say == is not allowed. POSIX tells you what the shell should at least be able to do. A POSIX compliant shell can have whatever other features it likes, as

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
On 27/05/2012, at 17:39, Geir Hauge wrote: > 2012/5/27 Jon Seymour : >> Is there a reason why bash doesn't treat == as an illegal test >> operator when running in POSIX mode? > > POSIX does not say == is not allowed. > > POSIX tells you what the shell should at least be able to do. A POSIX > co

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Dan Douglas
On Sunday, May 27, 2012 08:45:46 PM Jon Seymour wrote: > On 27/05/2012, at 17:39, Geir Hauge wrote: > > > 2012/5/27 Jon Seymour : > >> Is there a reason why bash doesn't treat == as an illegal test > >> operator when running in POSIX mode? > > > > POSIX does not say == is not allowed. > > > > P

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Andreas Schwab
Jon Seymour writes: > As it stands, I can't use bash's POSIX mode to verify the validity or > otherwise of a POSIX script because bash won't report these kinds of > errors - even when running in POSIX mode. You can't do that anyway: POSIX mode does not disable proper extensions to POSIX, only th

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Dan Douglas wrote: > On Sunday, May 27, 2012 08:45:46 PM Jon Seymour wrote: >> On 27/05/2012, at 17:39, Geir Hauge wrote: >> >> I guess the question is better phrased thus: what use case is usefully > served by having bash's POSIX mode support a superset of test o

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: > Jon Seymour writes: > >> As it stands, I can't use bash's POSIX mode to verify the validity or >> otherwise of a POSIX script because bash won't report these kinds of >> errors - even when running in POSIX mode. > > You can't do that anyway

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Jon Seymour wrote: > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote: >> Jon Seymour > ** I guess I can except that current bash behaviour is, on balance, except -> accept

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Dan Douglas
> POSIX hasn't provided a way to validate whether a script > only uses features that are required to be supported by POSIX > compliant interpreters. I believe that was someone else's point, but yes that would be a problem for anyone who wanted to implement compliance check warnings. > even if ba

Re: handling of test == by BASH's POSIX mode

2012-05-27 Thread Jon Seymour
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 2:08 AM, Dan Douglas wrote: > ... Bash > just modifies conflicting features to the minimal extent necessary to bring it > into compliance, which seems to be the path of least resistance. > Sure. I understand that this is a reasonable philosophy given that aiming for comple