On Sat, Mar 01, 2014 at 09:26:26PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 03/01/2014 05:10 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > > > On 27 February 2014 22:00, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > <mailto:swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > > > The following shell command fails: > > > > if test -z "$x"; then echo "zero"; else echo "non-zero"; fi > > > > (assuming $x does not exist, it prints "non-zero" rather than "zero"). > > > > ... since "$x" expands to nothing, and the argument is completely > > dropped, causing too few to be passed to -z, causing cmd_test() to > > error out early. > > > > This is because when variable expansions are processed by make_string(), > > the expanded results are concatenated back into a new string. However, > > no quoting is applied when doing so, so any empty variables simply don't > > generate any parameter when the combined string is parsed again. > > > > Fix this by explicitly replacing quoting any argument that was > > originally > > quoted when re-generating a string from the already-parsed argument > > list. > > > > This also fixes loss of whitespace in commands such as: > > > > setenv space " " > > setenv var " 1${space}${space} 2 " > > echo ">>${var}<<" > > > > > > Is there an upstream still for hush, or are we so far away that it > > doesn't matter? If there is, was this bug fixed there? > > Well, the comments at the head of the file say it came from Busybox, but > it's obviously diverged massively since it was imported: > > $ wc -l busybox/shell/hush.c u-boot/common/hush.c > 9156 busybox/shell/hush.c > 3682 u-boot/common/hush.c > $ diff -u busybox/shell/hush.c u-boot/common/hush.c|wc -l > 12264 > > Also, the function this patch touches doesn't seem to exist under that > name any more. From a quick look at the source, I couldn't tell what the > equivalent is. > > Perhaps replaying patches to that file in Busybox since the fork might > be more useful. > > A quick Google search for "hush" or "hush shell" doesn't seem to yield > any other alternative upstreams. For reference the patch is at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/325023/ Since U-Boot and Barebox are the only users of this particular hush fork, and from G+ they also have this problem, maybe we can use this as a starting point of a little more friendly coordination between the projects? -- Tom
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
