[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: RH9 breaks bash ?

On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 12:36, Tim Mooney wrote:
> I meant to mention this earlier -- Have you tested this *without* the
> extra leading 0?  I've always seen the escape sequences documented as
> 	\NNN	octal character NNN
> but you have 4 digits, which might mean that the sequence is not being
> interpreted as you expect.

(Not sure why we are having a shell discussion on rpm-list, but
anyway...) This was another thing that changed between a minor version
upgrade in bash at one point (the interpretation of octal codes changed
to match POSIX). A leading zero after a backslash in echo strings caused
the next three digits to be read in the later version (which may have
been the RH 9 one -- my memory is hazy), rather than just reading three
digits in total. An absolutely criminal change for such a minor version
increase, since it broke any number of scripts that were previously
using well-documented features.

Such is life. :-(


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]