* test failures on Solaris (was Re: zsh-5.2-test-2) [not found] ` <20161206194916.10448440@ntlworld.com> @ 2016-12-06 23:33 ` Danek Duvall 2016-12-07 0:36 ` Bart Schaefer [not found] ` <20161209095729.2033b5be@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Danek Duvall @ 2016-12-06 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Peter Stephenson; +Cc: zsh-workers I have two failures on Solaris, but what seem like the obvious fixes don't seem to work. First: .../zsh.git/Test/B02typeset.ztst: starting. --- /tmp/zsh.ztst.28063/ztst.err 2016-12-06 14:57:07.724783240 -0800 +++ /tmp/zsh.ztst.28063/ztst.terr 2016-12-06 14:57:07.725902052 -0800 @@ -1 +1 @@ -(eval):2: failed to change user ID: operation not permitted +(eval):2: failed to change user ID: not owner Test .../zsh.git/Test/B02typeset.ztst failed: error output differs from expected as shown above for: if (( UID )); then UID=$((UID+1)) date; echo "Status is printed, $?" else ZTST_skip="cannot test setuid error when tests run as superuser" fi Was testing: when cannot change UID, the command isn't run I tried --- a/Test/B02typeset.ztst +++ b/Test/B02typeset.ztst @@ -720,4 +720,4 @@ 0:when cannot change UID, the command isn't run # 'date' did not run. >Status is printed, 1 -?(eval):2: failed to change user ID: operation not permitted +*?(eval):2: failed to change user ID: * But then it complained with -(eval):2: failed to change user ID: * +(eval):2: failed to change user ID: not owner as if it wasn't expanding properly. The second: .../zsh.git/Test/C02cond.ztst: starting. This test takes up to 60 seconds... --- /tmp/zsh.ztst.671/ztst.err 2016-12-06 15:09:45.098489090 -0800 +++ /tmp/zsh.ztst.671/ztst.terr 2016-12-06 15:09:45.104223363 -0800 @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +(eval):1: command not found: mount Test .../zsh.git/Test/C02cond.ztst failed: error output differs from expected as shown above for: ... I tried --- a/Test/C02cond.ztst +++ b/Test/C02cond.ztst @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ # can't be bothered with -S - if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount})"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then + if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount || /usr/sbin/mount})"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then print -u $ZTST_fd 'This test takes two seconds...' else unmodified_ls="$(ls -lu $unmodified)" but it failed with the same error. I also see V10private.ztst, but I think that's just repeating the B02typeset.ztst error. Thanks, Danek ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: test failures on Solaris (was Re: zsh-5.2-test-2) 2016-12-06 23:33 ` test failures on Solaris (was Re: zsh-5.2-test-2) Danek Duvall @ 2016-12-07 0:36 ` Bart Schaefer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-07 0:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers, Danek Duvall On Dec 6, 3:33pm, Danek Duvall wrote: } } --- a/Test/B02typeset.ztst } +++ b/Test/B02typeset.ztst } @@ -720,4 +720,4 @@ } 0:when cannot change UID, the command isn't run } # 'date' did not run. } >Status is printed, 1 } -?(eval):2: failed to change user ID: operation not permitted } +*?(eval):2: failed to change user ID: * The parens in (eval) are pattern characters, so [[ "(eval):" != (eval): ]] } - if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount})"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then } + if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount || /usr/sbin/mount})"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then "mount" is going to print "command not found" even if /sbin/mount is subsequently found. We need to throw away stderr. diff --git a/Test/B02typeset.ztst b/Test/B02typeset.ztst index 9c56c7e..b27bb4f 100644 --- a/Test/B02typeset.ztst +++ b/Test/B02typeset.ztst @@ -720,4 +720,4 @@ 0:when cannot change UID, the command isn't run # 'date' did not run. >Status is printed, 1 -?(eval):2: failed to change user ID: operation not permitted +*?*: failed to change user ID: * diff --git a/Test/C02cond.ztst b/Test/C02cond.ztst index 27a2259..3852501 100644 --- a/Test/C02cond.ztst +++ b/Test/C02cond.ztst @@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ # can't be bothered with -S - if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount})"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then + if [[ ${mtab::="$({mount || /sbin/mount || /usr/sbin/mount} 2>/dev/null)"} = *[(]?*[)] ]]; then print -u $ZTST_fd 'This test takes two seconds...' else unmodified_ls="$(ls -lu $unmodified)" ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20161209095729.2033b5be@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>]
[parent not found: <20161209195457.27e43234@ntlworld.com>]
[parent not found: <584CB4EF.6070904@eastlink.ca>]
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 [not found] ` <584CB4EF.6070904@eastlink.ca> @ 2016-12-11 3:07 ` Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 3:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers, Ray Andrews [Moving to -workers] On Dec 10, 6:07pm, Ray Andrews wrote: } Subject: Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 } } On 12/09/2016 11:54 AM, Peter Stephenson wrote: } > } > 5.2-test-3 is in } > } > http://www.zsh.org/pub/development/ } > } > } Seems to have fired up ok, however: What is the platform where you are compiling? } } builtin.c:5041:11: warning: "cursplit" may be used uninitialized in } this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] } } compmatch.c:774:15: warning: "savl" may be used uninitialized in } this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] These are both spurious -- each of these variables shadows another which is always used/tested first and which is not used uninitialized. May as well shut up the warnings, though. } $ make check } } ./V10private.ztst: starting. } Pattern match failed: } } There ought to be more output than that ... please run $ ZTST_verbose=2 make check TESTNUM=V10 } BTW, if there a 'make check' that only shows errors or warnings? No } need to see all the stuff that's fine. No, but as shown above you can run specific tests if you already know the others to be OK. diff --git a/Src/Zle/compmatch.c b/Src/Zle/compmatch.c index f82f00e..aedf463 100644 --- a/Src/Zle/compmatch.c +++ b/Src/Zle/compmatch.c @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ match_str(char *l, char *w, Brinfo *bpp, int bc, int *rwlp, * * operation. Similar to savw. */ - char savl; + char savl = 0; /* * The anchor on this end. */ diff --git a/Src/builtin.c b/Src/builtin.c index e641a97..65e0cb1 100644 --- a/Src/builtin.c +++ b/Src/builtin.c @@ -4092,7 +4092,7 @@ bin_print(char *name, char **args, Options ops, int func) char *start, *endptr, *c, *d, *flag, *buf = NULL, spec[14], *fmt = NULL; char **first, **argp, *curarg, *flagch = "'0+- #", save = '\0', nullstr = '\0'; size_t rcount = 0, count = 0; - size_t *cursplit, *splits = 0; + size_t *cursplit = 0, *splits = 0; FILE *fout = stdout; #ifdef HAVE_OPEN_MEMSTREAM size_t mcount; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:07 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 3:26 ` Daniel Shahaf 2016-12-11 3:33 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Daniel Shahaf @ 2016-12-11 3:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers; +Cc: Ray Andrews Bart Schaefer wrote on Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 19:07:37 -0800: > +++ b/Src/Zle/compmatch.c > @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ match_str(char *l, char *w, Brinfo *bpp, int bc, int *rwlp, > * > * operation. Similar to savw. > */ > - char savl; > + char savl = 0; I see you've pushed this, but for what it's worth, it wouldn't have been my first choice. I'd rather have left the variable uninitialized in the (sfx is false) case, precisely so reading savl without checking sfx first would result in an "is used uninitialized" warning. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf @ 2016-12-11 3:33 ` Bart Schaefer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 3:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers On Dec 11, 3:26am, Daniel Shahaf wrote: } Subject: Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 } } Bart Schaefer wrote on Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 19:07:37 -0800: } > - char savl; } > + char savl = 0; } } I see you've pushed this, but for what it's worth, it wouldn't have been } my first choice. I'd rather have left the variable uninitialized in the } (sfx is false) case, precisely so reading savl without checking sfx } first would result in an "is used uninitialized" warning. Obviously though at least one compiler isn't clever enough to spot that detail, otherwise Ray wouldn't have seen the warning to begin with. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:07 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf @ 2016-12-11 3:26 ` Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 3:44 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 3:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bart Schaefer, zsh-workers [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4219 bytes --] On 12/10/2016 07:07 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote: > What is the platform where you are compiling? Debian testing in a rather old state of update > } $ make check > } > } ./V10private.ztst: starting. > } Pattern match failed: > } > } > > There ought to be more output than that ... please run > > $ ZTST_verbose=2 make check TESTNUM=V10 Verbose is right!: 9 /aMisc/Zsh-new/zsh-5.2-test-3 2$ ZTST_verbose=2 make check TESTNUM=V10 cd Test ; make check make[1]: Entering directory '/aMisc/Zsh-new/zsh-5.2-test-3/Test' if test -n "gcc"; then \ cd .. && DESTDIR= \ make MODDIR=`pwd`/Test/Modules install.modules > /dev/null; \ fi if ZTST_testlist="`for f in ./V10*.ztst; \ do echo $f; done`" \ ZTST_srcdir="." \ ZTST_exe=../Src/zsh \ ../Src/zsh +Z -f ./runtests.zsh; then \ stat=0; \ else \ stat=1; \ fi; \ sleep 1; \ rm -rf Modules .zcompdump; \ exit $stat ./V10private.ztst: starting. ZTST_getsect: read section name: prep ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: if ! zmodload zsh/param/private 2>/dev/null; then ZTST_unimplemented="can't load the zsh/param/private module for testing" else # Do not use .tmp here, ztst.zsh will remove it too soon (see %cleanup) mkdir private.TMP sed -e 's,# test_zsh_param_private,zmodload zsh/param/private,' < $ZTST_srcdir/B02typeset.ztst > private.TMP/B02 fi ZTST_execchunk: status 0 ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: ZTST_getsect: read section name: test ZTST_test: looking for new test ZTST_test: examining line: ZTST_test: examining line: (zmodload -u zsh/param/private && zmodload zsh/param/private) ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: (zmodload -u zsh/param/private && zmodload zsh/param/private) ZTST_test: examining line: Running test: unload and reload the module without crashing ZTST_test: expecting status: 0 Input: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.in, output: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.out, error: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.terr ZTST_execchunk: status 0 ZTST_test: test produced standard output: ZTST_test: and standard error: Test successful. ZTST_test: looking for new test ZTST_test: examining line: ZTST_test: examining line: ZTST_verbose=0 $ZTST_exe +Z -f $ZTST_srcdir/ztst.zsh private.TMP/B02 ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: ZTST_verbose=0 $ZTST_exe +Z -f $ZTST_srcdir/ztst.zsh private.TMP/B02 ZTST_test: examining line: *>* ZTST_getredir: read redir for '>': * ZTST_test: examining line: *>* ZTST_getredir: read redir for '>': * ZTST_test: examining line: Running test: typeset still works with zsh/param/private module loaded ZTST_test: expecting status: 0 Input: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.in, output: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.out, error: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.terr ZTST_execchunk: status 0 ZTST_test: test produced standard output: private.TMP/B02: starting. Test case skipped: cannot test setuid error when tests run as superuser private.TMP/B02: all tests successful. ZTST_test: and standard error: Pattern match failed: <* <* >private.TMP/B02: starting. >Test case skipped: cannot test setuid error when tests run as superuser >private.TMP/B02: all tests successful. Test ./V10private.ztst failed: output differs from expected as shown above for: ZTST_verbose=0 $ZTST_exe +Z -f $ZTST_srcdir/ztst.zsh private.TMP/B02 Was testing: typeset still works with zsh/param/private module loaded ./V10private.ztst: test failed. ZTST_getsect: read section name: clean ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: rm -r private.TMP ZTST_execchunk: status 0 ZTST_getchunk: read code chunk: ************************************** 0 successful test scripts, 1 failure, 0 skipped ************************************** Makefile:187: recipe for target 'check' failed make[1]: *** [check] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/aMisc/Zsh-new/zsh-5.2-test-3/Test' Makefile:263: recipe for target 'check' failed make: *** [check] Error 2 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 3:44 ` Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:59 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 4:11 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 3:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers; +Cc: Ray Andrews On Dec 10, 7:26pm, Ray Andrews wrote: } } Running test: typeset still works with zsh/param/private module loaded } ZTST_test: expecting status: 0 } Input: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.in, output: } /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.out, error: /tmp/zsh.ztst.8681/ztst.terr } ZTST_execchunk: status 0 } ZTST_test: test produced standard output: } private.TMP/B02: starting. } Test case skipped: cannot test setuid error when tests run as superuser Well, there you go. Stop running "make check" while superuser. I'm not sure this one is worth attempting to fix. The output of B02 is different for EUID=0 and V10 is attempting to pattern-match the expected successful output of B02. We'd need two different test cases with different output comparisons depending on whether "make check" is being run as root. Actually -- why is that test in B02 in the first place, rather than in say D04parameter.ztst ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:44 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 3:59 ` Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 9:36 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 4:11 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 3:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bart Schaefer, zsh-workers On 12/10/2016 07:44 PM, Bart Schaefer wrote: > Well, there you go. Stop running "make check" while superuser. Yabut there's a few other things that are very specific that they won't run as superuser, so you know you needn't worry about them as the messages are careful to explain. Shouldn't this one be similar? As for me, I'm always super user, I got sick of typing sudo 500 times a day ;-) They say we're not supposta, but it's my computer and I'll bust it if I wanta. Which I do, and there's always a lesson to learned from it. Just to be kosher: $ su ray $ make check ... ************************************** 47 successful test scripts, 0 failures, 1 skipped ************************************** make[1]: Leaving directory '/aMisc/Zsh-new/zsh-5.2-test-3/Test' ray@HP-w5--8-Debian1:/aMisc/Zsh-new/zsh-5.2-test-3$ ... I'll remember that for next time, thanks Bart. Dunno, maybe there could be a warning about that before the rest of the test runs? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:59 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 9:36 ` Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 17:01 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 9:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ray Andrews, zsh-workers On Dec 10, 7:59pm, Ray Andrews wrote: } } Yabut there's a few other things that are very specific that they won't } run as superuser, so you know you needn't worry about them as the } messages are careful to explain. Shouldn't this one be similar? Ideally yes, but in this case we're re-running B02 from inside V10; B02 got changed without V10 being changed, so my question is, where do we fix it, or do we just not bother because running the tests as superuser is so unusual in the first place. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 9:36 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 17:01 ` Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 17:14 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Bart Schaefer, zsh-workers [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 862 bytes --] On 12/11/2016 01:36 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote: > On Dec 10, 7:59pm, Ray Andrews wrote: > } > } Yabut there's a few other things that are very specific that they won't > } run as superuser, so you know you needn't worry about them as the > } messages are careful to explain. Shouldn't this one be similar? > > Ideally yes, but in this case we're re-running B02 from inside V10; > B02 got changed without V10 being changed, so my question is, where > do we fix it, or do we just not bother because running the tests as > superuser is so unusual in the first place. > Not mine to say of course, I suspect that a message would be easy enough, but any complexities are to be avoided. I'm a spit and polish fanatic, polish it until it gleams. Not the culture in unix/linux tho -- I suppose something so huge can never be polished like we polished things in DOS. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 17:01 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 17:14 ` Bart Schaefer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers On Dec 11, 9:01am, Ray Andrews wrote: } } I suppose something so huge can never be polished like we polished } things in DOS. Hey, if somebody wants to pay me to polish zsh (warning, I am not inexpensive) like everyone who polished DOS got paid, let me know and we can try to work something out. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 3:44 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:59 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews @ 2016-12-11 4:11 ` Daniel Shahaf 2016-12-11 8:58 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Daniel Shahaf @ 2016-12-11 4:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers; +Cc: Ray Andrews Bart Schaefer wrote on Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 19:44:21 -0800: > Actually -- why is that test in B02 in the first place, rather than in > say D04parameter.ztst ? Because it's about assignment, as opposed to substitution? If there's a better home for the test I don't mind moving it. (will reply to your other mail later or tomorrow) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 2016-12-11 4:11 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf @ 2016-12-11 8:58 ` Bart Schaefer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bart Schaefer @ 2016-12-11 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: zsh-workers On Dec 11, 4:11am, Daniel Shahaf wrote: } Subject: Re: zsh-5.2-test-3 } } Bart Schaefer wrote on Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 19:44:21 -0800: } > Actually -- why is that test in B02 in the first place, rather than in } > say D04parameter.ztst ? } } Because it's about assignment, as opposed to substitution? Then why isn't in it A06assign ? (Because it's not really about assignment, either -- it's about a special-parameter side-effect.) } If there's a better home for the test I don't mind moving it. It probably ought to be in A05execution, or maybe we need a new test file just for behavior of assorted special parameters. C06specials ? Incidentally, assigning to USERNAME attempts to change both UID and GID and is still only a warning, not an error. Further, if setuid() and setgid() aren't available, assignments to UID et al. silently do nothing, which is probably why failure of set?id() when available was never a hard error before. Passing thought, mostly unrelated: There should be tests of "getopts" in B08shift. I believe we still have some incompatibility with POSIX in OPTIND/OPTARG handling it would be nice to have an example of the current behavior with some mention of the difference in case we get around to fixing it. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-12-11 17:21 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- [not found] <CGME20161206195028epcas2p3c53119ab37952571be3238cdf228d88f@epcas2p3.samsung.com> [not found] ` <20161206194916.10448440@ntlworld.com> 2016-12-06 23:33 ` test failures on Solaris (was Re: zsh-5.2-test-2) Danek Duvall 2016-12-07 0:36 ` Bart Schaefer [not found] ` <20161209095729.2033b5be@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> [not found] ` <20161209195457.27e43234@ntlworld.com> [not found] ` <584CB4EF.6070904@eastlink.ca> 2016-12-11 3:07 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf 2016-12-11 3:33 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:26 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 3:44 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 3:59 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 9:36 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 17:01 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Ray Andrews 2016-12-11 17:14 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer 2016-12-11 4:11 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Daniel Shahaf 2016-12-11 8:58 ` zsh-5.2-test-3 Bart Schaefer
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/ 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).