- Original Message -
From: "Sean Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Thorsten Glaser Geuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 8. March 2001 13:01
Subject: Re: binfmt_script and ^M
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 09:10:26PM -, Thorsten Glaser Geue
Sean Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I propose
>
>/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
Well, too me it seems that you are intolerant.
I think that it should not be added to kern
- Original Message -
From: "David Weinehall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Sean Hunter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Laramie Leavitt"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, 6. March 2001 15:37
Subject: Re: binfmt_script and
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Peter Samuelson wrote:
> [Dr. Kelsey Hudson]
> > umm, last i checked a carriage return wasn't whitespace... space,
> > horizontal tab, vertical tab, form feed constitute whitespace IIRC...
>
> Where and when did you check? Several sources disagree with you.
a long while ago
- Original Message -
From: "Jesse Pollard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, 5. March 2001 19:14
Subject: Re: binfmt_script and
John Kodis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:36:29AM -0700, Jeff Coy wrote:
|>
|> > '#!/usr/bin/perl -w^M' works without any special handling; the link is
|> > not needed:
|>
|> This is the main reason that I think that the kernel should treat \r
|> as just another white
On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:36:29AM -0700, Jeff Coy wrote:
> '#!/usr/bin/perl -w^M' works without any special handling; the link is
> not needed:
This is the main reason that I think that the kernel should treat \r
as just another whitespace character: it's what most shells do, it's
what most use
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Jeff Coy]
> > this issue came up frequently with customers uploading scripts in
> > binary mode trying to run #!/usr/bin/perl^M. The solution for me was
> > to just do the following:
> >
> > cd /usr/bin
> > sudo ln -s perl^V^M perl
>
> S
[Dr. Kelsey Hudson]
> umm, last i checked a carriage return wasn't whitespace... space,
> horizontal tab, vertical tab, form feed constitute whitespace IIRC...
Where and when did you check? Several sources disagree with you.
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe li
Paul-
Minor historical note. The `#!' processing was never done by the
shell, this was always done in the kernel. Think about about it,
the `#' character denotes a comment line, the shell ignores that
line. `#!' was used to create a way for the kernel to execute
a shell script directly. Since
[Jeff Coy]
> this issue came up frequently with customers uploading scripts in
> binary mode trying to run #!/usr/bin/perl^M. The solution for me was
> to just do the following:
>
> cd /usr/bin
> sudo ln -s perl^V^M perl
So none of your customers tried '#!/usr/bin/perl -w^M'? (Com
Wouldn't it be easier to run the script interpreter through WINE ? This
way we could workaround several Win32 peculiarities, and users wouldn't
bother taking special steps when coding on their home PC.
Xav
Le 06 Mar 2001 15:12:42 +, Sean Hunter a écrit :
>
> I propose
>
>/proc/sys/kernel/i
- Received message begins Here -
>
> Jesse Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> |> Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Andreas Schwab
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> |> > Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> |> >
> |> > |> Andreas Schwab wro
On Tue, 6 Mar 2001, Sean Hunter wrote:
>
> I propose
>
>/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
>
> Any support?
Hrm - make it part of the "fscking_moron" subsystem.
/proc/sys/kernel/fsc
On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 03:12:42PM +, Sean Hunter wrote:
>
> I propose
>
>/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
>
> Any support?
Hey, let's go even further! Let's add support in a
I propose
/proc/sys/kernel/im_too_lame_to_learn_how_to_use_the_most_basic_of_unix_tools_so_i_want_the_kernel_to_be_filled_with_crap_to_disguise_my_ineptitude
Any support?
Sean
On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 02:45:51PM -, Laramie Leavitt wrote:
> > Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > > Paul Flinders <[EMAIL
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Robert Read wrote:
> And isspace('\n') is also true. At question here is not the
> definition of whitespace. The question is, what is the definition of
> a command line? What characters are valid command line seperators?
>
It doesn't seem likely that '\r' is going to be a
Jesse Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Andreas Schwab
|<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|> > Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> >
|> > |> Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > |>
|> > |> > This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significanc
> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > |> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> > |>
> > |> > This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significance here. The
> right thing to
> > |>
> > |> > look at is $IFS, which does not contain \r by default.
> The shell only splits
> > |>
> > |>
Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Andreas Schwab
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> |> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> |>
> |> > This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significance here. The right thing to
> |>
> |> > look at is $IFS, whic
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> |> Andreas Schwab wrote:
> |>
> |> > This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significance here. The right thing to
> |>
> |> > look at is $IFS, which does not contain \r by default. The shell only splits
> |>
> |> > words by "IFS wh
Hi!
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'. It's Microsoft junk
> > that does that, a throwback to CP/M, a throwback to MDS/200.
>
> Yes, _we_ all know that. However, it's not really intuitive to the user
> getting
Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> Andreas Schwab wrote:
|>
|> > This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significance here. The right thing to
|>
|> > look at is $IFS, which does not contain \r by default. The shell only splits
|>
|> > words by "IFS whitespace", and the kernel should be c
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Robert Read wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 07:58:52PM +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote:
> >
> > And what does POSIX say about "#!/bin/sh\r" ?
> > In other words: should the kernel look for the interpreter between the !
> > and the newline, or [the first space or newline] or the f
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 10:05:36PM +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Robert Read wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 07:58:52PM +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote:
> > >
> > > And what does POSIX say about "#!/bin/sh\r" ?
> > > In other words: should the kernel look for the interpreter betw
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>
> Unix does not, never has, and never will end a text line wit
> And what does POSIX say about "#!/bin/sh\r" ?
Nothing at all. The #! construction is not part of any standard
right now. The implementation is messy - different operating systems
do vaguely similar things, but all details differ.
Linux can do whatever it wants.
Of course it helps portability if
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Robert Read wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 07:58:52PM +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote:
> >
> > And what does POSIX say about "#!/bin/sh\r" ?
> > In other words: should the kernel look for the interpreter between the !
> > and the newline, or [the first space or newline] or the fir
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 07:58:52PM +0100, Pozsar Balazs wrote:
>
> And what does POSIX say about "#!/bin/sh\r" ?
> In other words: should the kernel look for the interpreter between the !
> and the newline, or [the first space or newline] or the first whitespace?
>
> IMHO, the first whitespace.
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No. I did not miss the point. The 'No such file or directory' error
> (when you can see the ^$^$)#@@*& filename with 'ls'), usually means
> that there is something wrong with the file.
Now, let's see. When this error happens, it can be one of t
Paul Flinders wrote:
> uses space (0x20) and tab (0x8) as white space and no other character.
>
I mean, of course, tab (_0x9_)
I just checked - the kernel isspace() macro says that \r is whitespace.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a me
Andreas Schwab wrote:
> This [isspace('\r') == 1] has no significance here. The right thing to
> look at is $IFS, which does not contain \r by default. The shell only splits
> words by "IFS whitespace", and the kernel should be consistent with it:
>
> $ echo -e 'ls foo\r' | sh
> ls: foo: No s
John Kodis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>
> Unix does not, never has, and never will end a text line with ' ' (
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, Paul Flinders wrote:
> Jeff Mcadams wrote:
>
> > Also sprach Rik van Riel
> > >On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > >> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > >> > h
Paul Flinders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> Jeff Mcadams wrote:
|>
|> > Also sprach Rik van Riel
|> > >On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
|> > >> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
|> > >> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
|>
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> The '\r' (^R) definitely has special significance to Unix. It's called
> "VREPRINT", in the termios structure member "c_cc".
>
'\r' is ^M, not ^R.
> There is really no suc
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> On 5 Mar 2001, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> > Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > $ head -1 testscript
> > > > #!/bin/sh
> > > > $ ./testscript bash: ./testscript: No such file or directory
> > > What kernel wants
Jeff Mcadams wrote:
> Also sprach Rik van Riel
> >On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> >> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> >> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>
> >> Un
Also sprach Rik van Riel
>On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
>> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>> Unix does not, never has, and never
On 5 Mar 2001, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So why would you even consider breaking bash as a work-around for
> > a broken script?
>
> I don't.
>
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will e
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>
> Unix does not, never has, and never will end a text line wit
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001, John Kodis wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> > has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
>
> Unix does not, never has, and never will end a text line with
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So why would you even consider breaking bash as a work-around for
> a broken script?
I don't.
> Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> has, and never will end a text line with '\r'. It's Microsoft junk
> that does t
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 08:40:22AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> Somebody must have missed the boat entirely. Unix does not, never
> has, and never will end a text line with '\r'.
Unix does not, never has, and never will end a text line with ' ' (a
space character) or with \t (a tab charact
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|> Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|>
|> > > $ head -1 testscript
|> > > #!/bin/sh
|> > > $ ./testscript
|> > > bash: ./testscript: No such file or directory
^
|> >
|> > What kernel wants t
On 5 Mar 2001, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > $ head -1 testscript
> > > #!/bin/sh
> > > $ ./testscript
> > > bash: ./testscript: No such file or directory
> >
> > What kernel wants to say is "/usr/bin/perl\r: no such file". Saying ENOEXEC
> > would
Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > $ head -1 testscript
> > #!/bin/sh
> > $ ./testscript
> > bash: ./testscript: No such file or directory
>
> What kernel wants to say is "/usr/bin/perl\r: no such file". Saying ENOEXEC
> would be even more confusing.
So, why don't we make bash say tha
Hi!
> > > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style
> > > newlines (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it
> > > doesn't recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this
> > > (untested).
>
> > Fix the script. The kernel expects a specific format
>
>
>
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:Jamie Lokier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> David wrote:
> > We wouldn't make the kernel translate m$ word docs into files the kernel
> > can parse. It's a userland thing and changing the kernel would change a
> > legacy th
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 01:44:08PM +, Alan Cox wrote:
> > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style
> > newlines (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it
> > doesn't recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this
> > (untested).
> Fix the script. The
David wrote:
> We wouldn't make the kernel translate m$ word docs into files the kernel
> can parse. It's a userland thing and changing the kernel would change a
> legacy that would cause a lot of confusion I would expect.
Now there's a thought. binfmt_fileextension, chooses the interpreter
b
Alistair Riddell wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Heusden, Folkert van wrote:
>
>> But; it's not that much of hassle to run it trough some awk/sed/whatsoever
>> script, would it? Imho there should be as less as possible code in the
>
>
> man fromdos (on most linux systems anyway)
>
tr -d '\r' <
Tim Waugh wrote:
> > Isn't `perl' overkill? Why not just:
> >
> > tr -d '\r'
>
> while read line; do echo ${line%?}; done
And those can be convert a set of files as "fromdos *.c" can they?
:-)
-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body o
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 12:59:48PM -0700, Don Dugger wrote:
> Isn't `perl' overkill? Why not just:
>
> tr -d '\r'
while read line; do echo ${line%?}; done
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordom
Ivo Timmermans wrote:
> Heusden, Folkert van wrote:
> > > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> > > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
> >
> > _should_ it work
Isn't `perl' overkill? Why not just:
tr -d '\r'
On Tue, Feb 27, 2001 at 08:20:59PM +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Ivo Timmermans wrote:
> > > _should_ it work with the \r in it?
> >
> > IMHO, yes. This set of files were created on Windows, then zipped and
> > uploaded to a Linux server,
Ivo Timmermans wrote:
> > _should_ it work with the \r in it?
>
> IMHO, yes. This set of files were created on Windows, then zipped and
> uploaded to a Linux server, unpacked. This does not change the \r.
Use `fromdos' to convert the files. Or this little Perl gem, which
takes a list of files
Alan Cox wrote:
> > > > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > > > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
> > >
> > > Fix the script. The kernel expects a specific format
> >
> > For what reason? Is it a standard to not allow it, or does
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, Heusden, Folkert van wrote:
> But; it's not that much of hassle to run it trough some awk/sed/whatsoever
> script, would it? Imho there should be as less as possible code in the
man fromdos (on most linux systems anyway)
--
Alistair Riddell - BOFH
IT Support Department, Ge
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 14:38:23 +0100
Ivo Timmermans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Heusden, Folkert van wrote:
> > > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style
> newlines
> > > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > > recognize the \r. The following pat
> > > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
> >
> > Fix the script. The kernel expects a specific format
>
> For what reason? Is it a standard to not allow it, or does it break
> other things?
T
Alan Cox wrote:
> > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
>
> Fix the script. The kernel expects a specific format
For what
> > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
> _should_ it work with the \r in it?
IV> IMHO, yes. This set of files were created
> When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
Fix the script. The kernel expects a specific format
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this li
Heusden, Folkert van wrote:
> > When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> > (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> > recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
>
> _should_ it work with the \r in it?
IMHO, yes. Th
> When running a script (perl in this case) that has DOS-style newlines
> (\r\n), Linux 2.4.2 can't find an interpreter because it doesn't
> recognize the \r. The following patch should fix this (untested).
_should_ it work with the \r in it?
There might be a problem with your patch: at the '*)
66 matches
Mail list logo
