From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#33344: 26.1; doc-view bounding-box recognition doesn't work on path names with spaces Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 21:29:41 +0200 Message-ID: <83wopf790a.fsf@gnu.org> References: <2721782.Y6SdopJXAr@calvin> <9ein120yhb.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83o9as9a6x.fsf@gnu.org> <2pmuqcalt3.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83h8gk93w8.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1542223786 7545 195.159.176.226 (14 Nov 2018 19:29:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:29:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 33344@debbugs.gnu.org, trent2@web.de To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 14 20:29:42 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0r7-0001rv-PY for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 20:29:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33860 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0tE-00028n-AS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:31:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rU-0001Ae-Qe for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:30:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rT-0005Ag-4I for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:30:04 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:48299) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rT-0005AJ-0p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:30:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rS-0002NC-Qj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:30:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:30:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 33344 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 33344-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B33344.15422238009093 (code B ref 33344); Wed, 14 Nov 2018 19:30:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 33344) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Nov 2018 19:30:00 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52557 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rP-0002Ma-Tn for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:30:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59950) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rO-0002MP-M1 for 33344@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:29:59 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rF-00052y-JE for 33344@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:29:53 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:44697) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rF-00052q-FX; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:29:49 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4867 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1gN0rD-0007dT-Ei; Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:29:49 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from Glenn Morris on Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:14:39 -0500) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:152396 Archived-At: > From: Glenn Morris > Cc: trent2@web.de, 33344@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 13:14:39 -0500 > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > I don't disagree, but that's not the point. The point is that this > > code was written to use the shell, and it works. Turning it upside > > down because it failed to quote a single argument risks introducing > > bugs and backward incompatibilities for what IMO is a very small gain. > > I don't think there's a mystery or grand design here. People sometimes > just reach for "shell-command" when they want to run an external > process, without thinking about the details. Yes, of course. My point, again, is that this is how it worked till now, so it is de-facto how people are used to it. > "sh -c STUFF" is the same as just STUFF unless STUFF relies on some > shell feature like globbing. If STUFF doesn't require any shell > features then calling it via a shell is at best inefficient and at > worst harmful (if the shell mishandles any portion of STUFF, as happens here). > It is clear by inspection that this particular call does not require > shell features, so it should not go through a shell. I agree, but again, that's not my point. My point is that shell-command and call-process/process-file are subtly different, beyond how "sh -c" differs from invoking the program directly. Just auditing the code to reveal those differences is a significant job, let alone making sure the differences do or don't matter in this case. So I questioned the wisdom of investing such an effort (or not investing it and risking subtle incompatibilities) for such a minor reason.