On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 03:21:27PM +0000, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:56:13PM +0000, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > > Side effect: printf is now always the builtin version (which behaves > > identically to /usr/bin/printf) and cannot be overridden via PATH (except > > via the undocumented %builtin mechanism).
> Are there any plans to document it? It would have to be fixed first so it has sensible behaviour. Right now all builtins, including ones that must execute as a builtin for full functionality, can be overridden via %builtin, which does not seem to make a lot of sense. POSIX (XCU 2.9.1.1 Command Search and Execution) requires that special builtins and some other builtins such as bg, cd and command be found without a PATH search. For consistency with execvp(3) and perhaps also for POSIX compliance, the special cases with % are not really good. Another way to allow overriding builtins would be to make each overridable builtin pretend to be in a directory (e.g. /usr/bin) and be found at that point in the PATH search. For example, printf could pretend to be /usr/bin/printf, which would mean PATH=/usr/bin printf would find the builtin, but PATH=/elsewhere:/usr/bin printf would find /elsewhere/printf if it exists. Command names containing slashes would not participate in this and always invoke the external program. For example, /usr/bin/printf would continue to use the external program. Some builtins in ksh93 (but not printf) work this way. If the echo builtin pretends to be /bin/echo, it is a bit strange because the two utilities are rather incompatible. If I take POSIX's list and add other utilities that must execute as a builtin for full functionality, only very few utilities remain. Many of these are non-standard and are not present in the filesystem. In the specific case of printf, note that the bash, ksh93 and zsh versions of the printf builtin support %n, writing the result into a specified shell variable, which can only work if it is a builtin. Although our printf does not support this and I do not plan on adding it, it means that various shell authors think printf should always be a builtin. The general issue is that I do not know how exactly %builtin is or can be used in practice. -- Jilles Tjoelker _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
