emo/busybox
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

hush: tweak comment, no code changes

Browse Source 
Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Denys Vlasenko 2018-08-14 11:04:58 +02:00
parent 4bf0854248
commit c97df2939e
1 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

8
shell/hush.c
View File

@ -3162,7 +3162,7 @@ static int o_get_last_ptr(o_string *o, int n)
* code for partially-quoted strings.
*
* Unfortunately, if we want to match bash and ash behavior in all cases,
* the logic can't be see as "shell-syntax argument is first transformed
* the logic can't be "shell-syntax argument is first transformed
* to a string, then globbed, and if globbing does not match anything,
* it is used verbatim". Here are two examples where it fails:
*
@ -3171,14 +3171,14 @@ static int o_get_last_ptr(o_string *o, int n)
* The globbing can't be avoided (because of '?' at the end).
* The glob pattern is: b\\\*? - IOW, both \ and * are literals
* and are glob-escaped. If this does not match, bash/ash print b\*?
* - IOW: they "unbackslash" the pattern.
* - IOW: they "unbackslash" the glob pattern.
* Now, look at this:
*
* v='\\\*'; echo b$v?
*
* The glob pattern is the same here: b\\\*? - an unquoted $var expansion
* The glob pattern is the same here: b\\\*? - the unquoted $v expansion
* should be used as glob pattern with no changes. However, if glob
* does not match, bash/ash print b\\\*? - NOT THE SAME as 1st example!
* does not match, bash/ash print b\\\*? - NOT THE SAME as first example!
*
* ash implements this by having an encoded representation of the word
* to glob, which IS NOT THE SAME as the glob pattern - it has more data.