From: Paul Smith <psmith@gnu.org>
To: Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>
Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] findprog: Support searching in a specified path string
Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 13:59:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f6c5ded4fa48c7d057914fc18996b91850d6db58.camel@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2906116.4hz8Lom1yu@omega>
On Sun, 2019-09-08 at 19:48 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > My suggestion was that BOTH these functions should not assume the CWD
> > if PATH is empty or missing, not that they should behave differently.
>
> OK. But what, do you suggest, should the functions do when confronted to
> an empty path? What is 'make' supposed to do when the Makefile defines
> PATH =
> ?
Very simply, in both the "unset PATH" and "PATH=" cases, it should
report all unqualified (containing no slashes) programs as not found.
That is clearly allowed by POSIX and IMO is the most expected, and
secure, behavior. Having PATH= be equivalent to PATH=., and even
moreso "unset PATH" be equivalent to PATH=., is quite odd IMO.
> > My personal opinion is that it's not difficult to come up with ways
> > findprog can be useful _in addition_ to simply being a precursor to
> > exec
>
> In this case we should probably add a flag argument that tells the
> function to do the complete lookup also when the progname contains a
> slash. For now, until someone claims that this functionality would
> be actually useful, I'll leave it as is.
I think this will not be needed. In the event that someone does need
this they can simply use the findprog-in module instead.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-08 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-06 23:10 [PATCH] findprog: Support searching in a specified path string Paul Smith
2019-09-06 23:21 ` Paul Smith
2019-09-07 10:42 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-07 13:17 ` Paul Smith
2019-09-08 11:38 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-08 14:03 ` Paul Smith
2019-09-08 14:59 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-08 16:25 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-08 17:34 ` Paul Smith
2019-09-08 17:48 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-08 17:59 ` Paul Smith [this message]
2019-09-09 18:54 ` Bruno Haible
2019-09-10 13:18 ` Paul Smith
2019-09-14 11:20 ` Bruno Haible
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f6c5ded4fa48c7d057914fc18996b91850d6db58.camel@gnu.org \
--to=psmith@gnu.org \
--cc=bruno@clisp.org \
--cc=bug-gnulib@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).