Re: [PATCH 8/7] syntax-check: fix violations and implement sc_useless_quotes_in_case_branch.

2011-11-22 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hi Eric, On 22 Nov 2011, at 12:09, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > On 21 Nov 2011, at 23:15, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 11/21/2011 07:47 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >>> Contrary to popular belief, Bourne shell does not resplit case >>> expressions after expansion, so if there are no shell unquoted >>> shell

Re: [PATCH 6/7] syntax-check: fix violations and implement sc_prohibit_test_const_follows_var.

2011-11-22 Thread Stefano Lattarini
[adding bug-autoconf in CC] On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Gary V wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 22 Nov 2011, at 03:07, Eric Blake wrote: > > > On 11/21/2011 07:47 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > >> To safely use a non-literal first argument to `test', you must > >> always prepend a literal non-`-' charact

Re: [PATCH 3/7] tests: migrate tests/sh.test checks to syntax-checks.

2011-11-22 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Gary V wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > On 22 Nov 2011, at 02:52, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > Hi Gary. Just a quick nit (I haven't looked at the whole > > series, and not even at the whole patch in fact; sorry). > > No apologies necessary, every little helps! Thank you. >

Re: [PATCH 6/7] syntax-check: fix violations and implement sc_prohibit_test_const_follows_var.

2011-11-22 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/22/2011 02:02 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> test a = "$b" >>> >>> is just as likely to trigger improper evaluation in buggy test(1) >>> implementations as: >>> >>> test "$b" = a >> >> :-o For real? On non-museum pieces? Okay, you've convinced me otherwise. It looks like even buggy vers

Re: [PATCH 8/7] syntax-check: fix violations and implement sc_useless_quotes_in_case_branch.

2011-11-22 Thread Eric Blake
On 11/22/2011 01:21 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >>> Likewise in the pattern expression; you could further change this to: >>> >>> case $lt_sysroot:$1 in >>> ?*:$lt_sysroot*) >> >> Good call, although narrowing the search down to eliminate false positives >> is a lot trickier in this case! >> >> I'm

Re: [PATCH 6/7] syntax-check: fix violations and implement sc_prohibit_test_const_follows_var.

2011-11-22 Thread Stefano Lattarini
On Tuesday 22 November 2011, Eric Blake wrote: > touch =; test -f =; echo $? > This is problematic also with pdksh 5.2.14 on Debian: $ pdksh -c 'touch ./=; test -f =; echo $?' pdksh: test: =: missing second argument 2 and with /bin/sh on OpenBSD 4.6 as well: $ /bin/sh -c 'touch ./=; test