From: Robert Earl <chupchup@piggy.ucsb.edu>
To: rc@archone.tamu.edu
Subject: exec'ing with relative pathname
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1991 21:12:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9109280312.AA09895@piggy.ucsb.edu> (raw)
I reported this problem to Byron earlier, and since then I've realized
why he got different results than I did...
The rc manpage says this:
The first word of a com-
mand is the name of that command. If the name begins with
/, ./, or ../, then the name is used as an absolute path
name referring to an executable file. Otherwise, the name
of the command is looked up in a table of shell functions,
builtin commands, or as a file in the directories named by
$path.
Now, say I have a binary in a temporary directory under the current
one, and I want to run it, I type in a command like
; tmp/foo
rc reports "tmp/foo not found" (for me)
According to the manpage, this isn't an absolute pathname and the
search in functions, builtins, and $path is done. All other shells
seem to treat this just like
$ ./tmp/foo
which seems correct to me, mostly because the UNIX (and others :)
idiom `open("tmp/foo", ..)' wants to open a file relative to the
current directory.
Byron tested this out and told me it worked "right" for him (it found
./tmp/foo); but it occurred to me that maybe "." was in his path (it's
not in mine), which means yes, eventually the $path search matched
"./tmp/foo" and it found the command. For me, it never even tried
"./tmp/foo"; it did try $home/bin/sun4/tmp/foo, $home/bin/tmp/foo,
/usr/local/bin/tmp/foo, ad nauseum.
sh's rule is worlds simpler than rc's, and I don't see any reason not
to make rc do the same:
If the command name contains a
/ the search path is not used. Otherwise, each directory in
the path is searched for an executable file.
What does everyone else think?
robert earl rearl@piggy.ucsb.edu
ella megalast burls forever
next reply other threads:[~1991-09-28 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1991-09-28 2:12 Robert Earl [this message]
1991-09-28 3:27 ` Chris Siebenmann
1991-09-30 15:54 Donn Cave
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9109280312.AA09895@piggy.ucsb.edu \
--to=chupchup@piggy.ucsb.edu \
--cc=rc@archone.tamu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).