From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6674: PATCH: fix assignment of grep-find-use-xargs on Windows Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 06:10:10 +0300 Message-ID: <83aap5zp4d.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878w564xtc.fsf@telefonica.net> <871vax3fox.fsf@telefonica.net> <4C464307.8050407@gmail.com> <83pqyhcwit.fsf@gnu.org> <4C562BB7.6000702@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280720294 9600 80.91.229.12 (2 Aug 2010 03:38:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 03:38:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ofv@wanadoo.es, lekktu@gmail.com, bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Christoph Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 02 05:38:12 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oflqu-0006V6-1o for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 05:38:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59150 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oflqs-0004SS-ST for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:38:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50335 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oflqk-0004RT-CT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:38:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oflqi-0004Ne-8q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:38:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:52959) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oflqi-0004Na-4J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:38:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPf-0008JI-S1; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 03:10:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6674 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.128071859331934 (code B ref -1); Mon, 02 Aug 2010 03:10:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Aug 2010 03:09:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPV-0008J1-39 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:09:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPT-0008Iw-Ds for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:09:52 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:42016) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPp-0007lI-Qf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54580 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OflPo-0005wf-CS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPn-0001AY-20 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:45490) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OflPm-0001AJ-Nr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:11 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L6I00L008NXE700@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 06:10:08 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.247.236]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L6I00IFM8SVMMK0@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 06:10:08 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <4C562BB7.6000702@gmail.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 23:10:03 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:39128 Archived-At: > Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 20:21:43 -0600 > From: Christoph > CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, lekktu@gmail.com, ofv@wanadoo.es > > On 7/20/2010 10:02 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Thanks. To make my intent clear: I meant to enhance cmdproxy to use a > > batch file when invoking the windows shell. You will see that there's > > a variable need_shell in cmdproxy's `main' function which gets set to > > a non-zero value when cmdproxy decides it needs to pass the command > > the the shell instead of invoking it directly. What I suggested is to > > modify the code in this case to put the command on a temporary batch > > file, then invoke the shell on that batch file rather than on the > > command itself. > > Eli, > I remember a comment of yours earlier in the thread that DOS does not > have the problem. That's right. > I assume that this is due to a difference in command.com vs cmd.exe? No. That's because the DOS port doesn't call command.com at all. It has its own implementation of a shell as part of the `system' function in the standard library it links against. That implementation supports pipes, redirection, quoting, long (up to 16KB) command lines, and a few other minor Posix features, like /dev/null. > Do we want to execute the batch file only in case of cmd.exe or for both > command.com and cmd.exe? Yes, for the benefit of Windows 9X. Thanks.