From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: Re: Stable 2.0 and popen.test on Debian Squeeze Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:07:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1298844324 31408 80.91.229.12 (27 Feb 2011 22:05:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 22:05:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-guile@gnu.org To: Francis Southern Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 27 23:05:20 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@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 1Ptojw-00061U-0V for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 23:05:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34590 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ptojv-0000Dk-Dy for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:05:19 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56687 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ptogi-0005cc-Jf for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:02:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ptogh-00064L-JI for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:02:00 -0500 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:49786 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ptogh-00064C-Fr for bug-guile@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:01:59 -0500 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AA6A3D40; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:03:15 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=M/vaPKNgu56j4oJY5w16M1JxsKk=; b=ee9FgJ n+2N9T/a/vVY8WonWp0BForeEGCTmawLr3XTuDm9GO12YPP26yCgTQ9teRtBwP2o Bs7TTJhfJusyYcBHt94xAifDgPpfE2bQ7tLtc2btrixOWyVjX60SgVdpkW9NV9gK Q+oIqfT60KW2jJhwnxqCqc9i9xBYtiI5rncs0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=LAbdBLGsTzXmo6iW0xh8sJgACDm1U0/n mUc/LMce8lN3WB7Al6P60X0Pa6VpeJXkNd7dpWeMRbb/Zo0hC+XjrUXYBa/eNw+n YK++nkvj49rydtxHjRlsCt6yBUeiDvVSSEjP2fGMp3PEGdOI059BkpuJsE+wAXxS D8rEgm4H+oQ= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC8133D3F; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:03:13 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 497FB3D3B; Sun, 27 Feb 2011 17:03:11 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Francis Southern's message of "Thu, 24 Feb 2011 23:01:20 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5F7B584A-42BD-11E0-8E6A-AF401E47CF6F-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:5242 Archived-At: On Fri 25 Feb 2011 06:01, Francis Southern writes: > As you may know, several people have been having problems with > `popen.test' with 2.0 on Debian Squeeze. After a suggestion from > Ludovic on IRC, I tried running it with my /bin/sh symlinked to Bash > rather than Dash and there were no unexpected failures. Yay. Whoa, that's a good one. The difference seems to be the difference between: dash -c 'exec 1>/dev/null; echo closed 1>&2; exec 2>/dev/null; read' and bash -c 'exec 1>/dev/null; echo closed 1>&2; exec 2>/dev/null; read' Dash prints "closed" and exits immediately with error code 2. Bash prints "closed" and waits for input from the "read". Are we relying on non-portable shell behavior here? Andy -- http://wingolog.org/