- 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 '*)
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).
Please Cc me on replies, I'm not on this list. Thanks.
--- binfmt_script.c~Mon Feb 26 17
67 matches
Mail list logo
